论文部分内容阅读
对于《物权法》第24条的规定,我国在理论和实践上几乎一致认为,作为特殊动产的船舶、航空器和机动车需要交付才能发生物权变动,未经登记不能对抗善意第三人。这种理解从法律解释学意义上说是错误的。正确理解应当是:《物权法》第24条规定的物权变动不以交付为必要,交付不具有转移所有权的效力。交付在《物权法》第24条中的意义,只体现在“一物二卖”时具有优先于其他合同债权人的效力。
As stipulated in Article 24 of the “Property Law”, our country has almost the same theory and practice that ships, aircraft and vehicles that are special movable properties need to be delivered in order to change property rights and can not confront goodwill third parties without registration. This understanding is wrong in the sense of legal hermeneutics. Correct understanding should be: “property law” Article 24 of the change of real right not to deliver as necessary, the delivery does not have the effect of the transfer of ownership. The meaning of delivery in Article 24 of the Property Law only manifests itself in the effect that it has priority over other contractual creditors in the case of “one thing, two pieces of sale”.