论文部分内容阅读
历史法学派的民族精神说,其实是在当时民族国家逐渐形成,民族意识逐步复苏的时候,作为一种意识在法学方面的反映,作为民族意识的一种载体,法学的研究在这种情结之下就必然的要从法律的历史上来说。而萨蒂二人的争论,只不过是在资本主义民族国家发展过程中两种经济模式的法律上的反映。萨维尼的无权行为和高度抽象无因性理论,只是在资本主义自由经济之下的一种思想,在市场交易之中,真正权利人代表了交易安全和所有权的保护,善意第三人就是市场交易秩序的化身,当出现利益冲突的时候,立法者是应当保护真正的权利人,这是一种价值利益的抉择。立法者是选择交易安全还是选择市场交易,就是这两种理论关键之所在。
According to the national spirit of the school of history law, in fact, when the nation-state was gradually formed and national consciousness was gradually recovering, it was reflected as a kind of awareness in jurisprudence and as a carrier of national consciousness. In this complicated situation, Necessarily, it is necessary from the legal history. The argument of Satie, however, is merely a legal reflection of the two economic models in the development of a capitalist nation-state. Savigny’s theory of powerlessness and highly abstract theory of non-nature is only an idea under a capitalist free economy. In market transactions, the real right-holder represents the protection of transactional security and ownership. The third party in goodwill is It is a choice of value and benefit that the legislator should protect the true rights holders when there is a conflict of interest in the market transaction order. Whether legislators choose to trade safely or choose market transactions is where the two theories lie.