法學期刊
  • 社群分享
論著名稱:
論流抵約款之比較適用-以民法第 873 條之 1 規定的適用為中心(The Research Of The Contract Which Transferring Borrower's Security property Through Lender Acting As An Escrow Agent To Sale The Property And Use The Fund To Pay The Loan)
文獻引用
編著譯者: 古振暉
出版日期: 2010.06
刊登出處: 台灣/財產法暨經濟法第 22 期/1-37 頁
頁  數: 24 點閱次數: 906
下載點數: 96 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 古振暉
關 鍵 詞: 流抵契約抵押權擔保法清算義務預告登記
中文摘要: 我國民法於 2007 年 3 月 28 日修正增訂民法第 873 條之 1 規定,並刪除民法第 873 條第 2 項之規定,正式廢止流抵禁止的原則,故流抵契約的適用成為我國擔保法制新的課題。本文基於以流抵契約實行為抵押權實行方法的一種,探討流抵契約實行在抵押權現行規定適用可能發生的問題及解決方法,並就訂有流抵約定但以預約買賣等方式為預告登記者,應如何類推適用抵押權的規定,參照日本「假登記擔保法」的規定,並為比較?究。
英文關鍵詞: Contract of disposition of mortgaged property by payoffmortgagesecurity lawthe obligation of payoff Provisional registration
英文摘要: The most common method in American for transferring mortgage property is the borrower simply to pay off the loan from proceeds of the sale and have the existing mortgage released, particularly the payoff way is adopted through lender acting as an escrow agent to sale the property and use the fund to pay the loan, However, the private sale method that is admitted and accomplished legislation in our country property law is lately on March 28, 2007. Therfore, The interesting question that the article aim to research arises how the new method roll smoothly in the primary security law. At the same time, people sometimes conceal their content that the borrower use his property as security for lender through the contract which the property were forespoken to sell to the lender. The security way how to use in the security law is also the article's research subject.
目  次: 壹、前言
貳、修法前的困境
參、修法後規定之分析
一、要件
二、效力
三、規定之疑義
肆、流抵約款有效性的學說
一、日本的學說
二、我國的學說
三、本文見解
伍、民法第 873 條之 1 規定的適用
一、清算義務
二、實行債權的效力
三、法定地上權
四、共同擔保
陸、民法第 873 條之 1 規定的類推適用
一、受擔保債權
二、實行債權的效力
三、法定地上權
四、共同擔保
柒、結論
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
相關論著:
古振暉,論流抵約款之比較適用-以民法第 873 條之 1 規定的適用為中心,財產法暨經濟法,第 22 期,1-37 頁,2010年06月。
返回功能列