论文部分内容阅读
抵押权预告登记的产生,既是为了满足预购商品房者融资的需要,又是为了控制银行贷款风险。然而,我国相关法律对预购房抵押权预告登记的效力规定并不完善,使得司法实践中对预购商品房抵押权预告登记的效力判定存在银行是否可以据此认定已成立抵押权并有权对争议房产优先受偿以保障债权的争议。理论界对预购商品房抵押权预告登记的效力有“准物权”、债权和认为抵押无效的不同观点。通过对判例、法条和学术观点的梳理,预购商品房抵押权登记属于债权请求权,我国的法律不应仅规定预告登记的权利保全效力,应当将顺位保全效力也纳入其中,以保障银行的债权。在非因银行一方过错而不能及时进行房屋抵押本登记时,不能取消预告登记的效力、并可借助顺位保全效力为银行的债权提供具有物权效力的保障。
The pre-registration of mortgage arises not only for the purpose of financing the pre-purchase of commercial houses but also for controlling the risk of bank loans. However, the relevant laws in our country preliminarily pre-register the validity of pre-registration is not perfect, making the judicial practice of pre-order commercial real estate pre-registration to determine the validity of the existence of banks may determine that mortgage has been established and the right to controversial real estate Priority to be paid to protect claims of controversy. Theoretical circles on the pre-order real estate mortgage pre-registration of the effectiveness of “quasi-property ”, claims and that the mortgage invalid view. Through sorting out the precedents, legal provisions and academic views, the pre-purchase registration of real estate mortgage belongs to the right of claim. Our country’s law should not only stipulate the validity of the right to advance notice of registration, but also include the effect of preemptive preservation in order to protect the bank’s Claims. In the non-bank side due to the failure to timely mortgage registration, you can not cancel the effect of pre-registration, and with the effect of the sequence preservation of the bank’s claims to provide property with the effect of security.