论文部分内容阅读
婚姻法解释三的出台使夫妻财产关系成为舆论焦点,尤其是第七条被认为偏离传统的、合乎伦理的夫妻财产共有制,走向了夫妻财产分别制。因理论上一直未对一方婚后取得夫妻共有财产的性质进行全面论证,使得物权公示原则的适用范围存在模糊地带,亟待澄清。审视第七条两款的表述,其根据物权公示原则推定赠与人内心意思在解释技术上显得合理有据,实质上则有违物权公示原则,将以非法律行为取得物权归入物权公示原则的适用范围,必然导致理论体系的混乱。
The promulgation of the interpretation of marriage law 3 makes the relationship between husband and wife become the focus of public opinion, especially Article VII is considered deviate from the traditional, ethical common ownership of husband and wife, to the husband and wife property system. Due to the fact that the nature of the property acquired by one husband after marriage has not been fully demonstrated in theory, the applicability of the principle of property rights is blurred and needs to be clarified urgently. Examining the statement of Article 7, according to the principle of publicity of property, it is presumed that the gratuitous person’s inner meaning appears technically justified in explaining the explanation. In essence, it has the principle of disclosure of property right, The scope of application of the right to publicize the principle will inevitably lead to the chaos of the theoretical system.