物权变动与债权行为生效要件差异性分析

The Different Necessity between Alternation of ius in rem (sachenrecht)and Validation of the Behavior of the Creditor's Right

物权变动与债权行为的生效要件应严格区分,各自独立。将物权变动要件作为债权行为的生效依据或者相反均有违物权法理论。我国目前有关规定存在的缺陷应予纠正,并在未来物权立法中坚持两者严格区分的制度。

The necessity of the alternation of ius in rem (sachenrecht) and validation of the behavior of the creditors right should be maintained independent of each other and distinguished strictly. It is a misunderstanding of ius in rem (sachenrecht) theory to regard the necessity of the alternation of ius in rem (sachenrecht) as the effective evidence of the behavior of the creditors right, and vice versa. The drawback of present regulation in China should be corrected, and the legislation of ius in rem (sachenrecht) should hold on to the rule of strictly distinguishing the two.