透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.129.22.135
  • 期刊

裁判分割確定但未登記之應有部分之處分與拍賣效力之探討-以信賴登記要件與既判力主觀效力之適用為中心

A Study on the Conflict between the Judgement upon Division of Joint Property and the Judicial Auction Sale-- Focus on Protection of Bona Fide Third Person and the Effect of Binding Force

摘要


共有人就裁判分割確定但未登記之應有部分為契約行為,在應有部分之代位物為單獨所有物或補償金債權時,原則上,該應有部分已相對滅失而不存在,屬於自始主觀不能之契約,在執行程序則為無效拍賣,僅能在受讓人善意信賴原不實登記而取得該本已不存在之應有部分所有權,且因民事訴訟法第401條第1項前段規定之目的性限縮適用,不受裁判分割確定判決之既判力拘束;在共有物經變價分割時,應有部分在變價前仍繼續存續,以之為契約標的、處分對象、拍定物件,均屬有效,並不存在不實之物權原登記,自無所謂信賴登記取得不動產物權之情形,僅買受人係應有部分繼受人而原則受裁判分割確定判決既判力拘束。

並列摘要


The court award three kinds of partition: a. Partition in kind; b. Partition by allotment; or c. Partition by sale. Under the first and second circumstances, the share of the co-owner might become a new and independent property or money claim. In this kind of situations, theoretically, the share of the co-owner is gone. Therefore, this forms an impossible condition to any disposition involving with this share. Any assignee of this share seems not restrict to the binding force of the judgment upon the partition litigation. However, under the third circumstances, the co-owner can still dispose of his share until the common property being sold. Thus, any assignee of this share should also be restrict to the binding force of the judgment upon the partition litigation.

參考文獻


王澤鑑(2014)。民法物權。臺北:自版。
王澤鑑(2017)。損害賠償法。臺北:自版。
立法院(2009),〈院會記錄〉,《立法院公報》,98 卷5 期, 頁253-302
立法院(2017),〈院會記錄〉,《立法院公報》,106 卷60 期,頁747-749
吳從周(2007)。訴訟繫屬後之特定繼受人與善意取得之保護—評最高法院九十六年度台抗字第四七號裁定。台灣本土法學雜誌。99,67-77。

延伸閱讀