摘要
随着我国经济的快速发展，人们的生活水平得到极大地提高，追求高品质的生活成为主旋律。出门以车代步已经渐渐成为高品质生活的代表之一，然而私家车数量逐年剧增，不仅为城市的交通造成极大的压力，更对住宅小区内车位、车库的数量提出了更高的要求。停车需求的不断增加与住宅小区内车位、车库数量的恒定导致供求矛盾明显，小区业主与开发商之间或者小区业主之间关于小区车位、车库产权或使用权的诉讼屡见不鲜。有的开发商认为，小区的车位、车库是其出资建造的，且业主在购买房屋时，小区车位、车库的面积并不在分摊的公用面积中，根据“谁投资、谁得益”的原则，车位、车库的产权理应由开发商享有。有的小区业主却认为，小区的车位和车库可以看作是住宅小区内由业主享有共有权的公共设施，小区业主在购房之后，车位、车库作为公用设施应当也随之转让。买车容易，停车难已然成为当前住宅小区内最普遍的问题，而小区内车位、车库权属不明的情况则加剧了小区内停车难的矛盾与纠纷，因此理清小区车位、车库的权属对于解决这一矛盾具有积极的作用。
在我国《物权法》颁布实施前，并没有一部法律对小区车位、车库的权属做出明确、统一的规定，致使处理与车位、车库相关的纠纷没有统一的规则，各地法院的相关判决也都大不相同。2007 年 3 月 16 日《物权法》通过，该法第七十四条第一次对小区的车位、车库的权属从法律层面进行了规定，可以说，《物权法》的出台终结了我国关于车位、车库立法不一致的局面。《物权法》第七十四条的规定，使小区车位、车库的产权归属更清晰，更明确化，利于定纷止争，维护社会的和谐、稳定。此外，对于加强对小区车位、车库产权的管理及利用，提高车位、车库的利用率，提高开发商投资建造车位、车库的积极性也起到了重大的作用。同时，《物权法》第七十四条的规定过于原则性，在理解和适用上都给实践带来困难。《物权法》在制定权属规则前并未对小区车位、车库的类型进行区分，对于“首先满足业主需要”的具体界定以及“约定”在确定小区车位、车库权属中的效力等等问题都没有进一步的规定与解释，造成在产生纠纷时，有法不能依或有法无法依的情况仍然普遍存在，《物权法》的实施并未彻底结束有关小区车位、车库权属的纠纷。对《物权法》进一步地完善及细化，有效解决小区车位、车库权属纠纷迫在眉睫。
本文通过比较法学、逻辑学、演绎分析、归纳总结等等分析方法，从实证和理论两方面进行考察，对我国小区车位、车库的权属问题进行研究。从关于小区车位、车库权属的五个不同观点引出全文，然后通过对比各国及地区的立法与学说进行比较分析，再从理论的层面上对小区车位、车库的类型、性质等进行分析研究，最后对《物权法》第七十四条的规定进行分析评论，并就完善该条款提出了自己的建议。
全文共分为四章。
第一章主要对当前关于小区车位、车库权属的五种观点进行阐述，第一种观点是面积分摊说，该说认为应当依照小区车位、车库的建筑面积是否计入小区的公摊面积作为判断车位、车库权属的依据。第二种观点是业主共有说，该说则认为小区的车位和车库可以视为住宅小区建筑物的从物，故车位、车库的所有权也应当由小区业主共同所有，并随整栋建筑物而一并转移给小区业主共有。第三种观点是当事人约定说，该说认为当事人可以通过出售、出租等方式来约定车位、车库的归属，即法律给予业主约定车位、车库权属的权利。第四种观点是开发商所有说，该说认为小区车位、车库的所有权应归开发商所有，且车位、车库能够成为独立的客体，可以进行单独交易，而非如从物要随主物的转移而转移。第五种观点是国家所有说，该说仅针对防空车库，指的是小区的防空车库是国家重要的军事设施，不应由个人享有其所有权，车库的所有权应当归国家所有。笔者对这五种观点进行阐述，结合社会现状分别对这五种观点的优缺点进行评析，并就此提出笔者的观点与看法。
第二章主要通过比较研究的方法，考察及分析日本、美国、德国、法国、我国台湾地区、我国澳门地区几个主要国家及地区关于小区车位、车库权属的立法及学说，并对这些立法与学说进行分类及评析，总结出三种权属模式，第一种模式是小区车位、车库由开发商所有的模式，采用该模式的国家，一般把小区车位、车库作为专有权的客体，由开发商享有其产权，并依照业主的需求，分别向其出售或出租车位、车库。在此种模式下，小区业主在向开发商购买房屋时拥有是否购买车位的选择权。第二种模式是小区车位、车库由小区业主共有的模式。该模式一般采用两种形式，其一，由小区的全体业主享有车位、车库的共有权，在业主取得专有部分之后即享有车位、车库的共有持分权。其二，对小区业主共用的停车场设置专用使用权，需要使用车位、车库的业主在缴纳一定费用后，就可以获得车位、车库的排他性使用权。第三种模式是分类确定小区车位、车库权属的模式，日本与我国台湾地区一般采用这种模式。各国和地区不同的立法及学说都有其利弊，也并不都适合我国的现状。通过本章节的阐述，笔者希望能够为解决我国有关车位、车库的权属纠纷提供些思路与范例，对我国的立法能有所借鉴。
第三章从小区车位、车库的法律定位出发进行分析研究。笔者阐述了小区车位、车库的定义及类型，论述了不同性质的车位、车库的权属问题。首先，对小区车位、车库的内涵和类型进行阐述和分析，其类型一般分为：地面停车位、地下车库、架空层停车位、防空车库。这四类车位、车库的法律性质也大不相同，本文从独立性的角度、主物从物的角度及经济效益的角度对车位、车库的法律性质及权属问题进行了理论分析。我国现行《物权法》对于建筑物区分所有权制度中有关小区车位、车库权属问题的规定并不明确、清晰，广受诟病，在实际操作中也存在诸多问题，对小区车位、车库进行明确的法律定位对于理清其权属规则具有重大的意义。
第四章主要是在实务层面，针对住宅小区内车位、车库的具体权利归属制度进行研究。《物权法》第七十四条第一次就住宅小区车位、车库的权属问题进行了原则性界定，但这种原则性的界定给司法实践带来了很多理解和适用上的难题。《物权法》第七十四条的规定第一次以立法的形式规定了小区车位、车库的权属规则，但是该法条并不完善，笔者首先分析了该条款的利与弊，找出问题所在，再对其缺陷逐步分析。对“应当首先满足业主需要”进行剖析，对约定的方式确定权属发表自己的见解，对“其他场地”的概念进行分析，在本章最后对《物权法》的完善提出自己的意见。当然，理论研究的重要目的就是为了指导实践，笔者希望通过本章的评析和论述能够起抛砖引玉的作用，让小区车位、车库的权属问题得到更多的重视。
[关键词] 车位；车库；权属；物权法
Abstract
With the rapid developm ent of our ec onomy, people's living standards havebeen greatly im proved, the pursuit of hi gh quality of life has becom e the m ainmelody. Out to scooter has gradually become the representative of the quality of life.
However, the number of private cars is in creasing year by year, not only for urbantraffic caused great pressure, more the number of residential parking spaces, garageput forward higher requirements. Parking demand and the increase in the number ofresidential parking spaces, th e number of the constan t lead to the c ontradictionbetween supply and dem and, residential property owners and developers orresidential property owners on the residential parking spaces, garage property rightsor the use of the right. Som e developers believe that th e area of parking spaces,garage is the constr uction of its investm ent, and the owners in the purchase ofhousing, residential parking, garage area is not in the public area of assessment,according to the principle of “who invests, who benefit”, parking, garage propertyrights should be enjoyed by the developers . Some residential property ownersbelieve that the area of parking spaces, garage is attached to the community of publicfacilities, it should be by the owners of a ll residential areas, residential propertyowners in the purchase, parking sp aces, garage as public f acilities should also betransferred. Easy to bu y a car, parking is d ifficult to beco me the m ost commonresidential area, and the area of p arking spaces, garage ownership is not clear ,exacerbated by the difficulty of parking spaces and disputes, and therefore to clarifythe district parking spaces, g arage management authority to resolve thiscontradiction has a positive effect.
Chinese “real right law ” promulgated before the implementation, and no law onresidential parking, garage ownership to make a clear and unified regulations,resulting in the handling of parking spaces, garage related disputes have no unifiedrules, the relevant decisions of the courts are also di fferent. March 16, 2007 “Realright law” through, the law of the seventy-fourth first time to the residential parkingspaces, garage ownership from the legal leve l, it can be said, “Real rig ht law” theintroduction of the end of China's parking spaces, garage legislation inconsistentsituation. “Real right law” seventy-fourth provisions, so that the residential parkingspaces, garage ownership of property righ ts more clearly, more clearly, to s et adispute, maintain social harm ony and st ability. In addition, to strengthen themanagement and utilization of residential parking spaces, garage property rights,improve the utilization of parking spaces, garage, improve the investment in theconstruction of parking spaces, the enthusiasm of the garage also played a major role.
At the same time, “Real right law” seventy-fourth of the provisions of too principle,in the understanding and application are dif ficult to practice. “Real right law” in thedevelopment of ownership of the rules before the district parking spaces, garage typedistinction, “first m eet the owners need to meet th e needs of the owners” and“agreement” in the determination of residential parking spaces, garage ownership inthe effectiveness of th e problem, resulting in disputes, the law can not be inaccordance with the law is still widespread, the implementation of Real right law hasnot been completely end of the residential parking spaces, garage ownership disputes.
On the “Real righ t law” to f urther improve and refine, the effective settlement ofresidential parking spaces, garage ownership disputes imminent.
In this paper , through the com parison of law , logic, deductive analysis,summarized and so on analysis methods, from the empirical and theoretical study ofthe two aspects of the residential parking spaces, garage management authority in thestudy. From five dif ferent views on reside ntial parking spaces, garage ownership,and then through the comparison of national and regional legislation and the theoryof comparative analysis, and then from the theoretical level of residential parkingspaces, garage type, nature of the theoreti cal analysis, and finally the “Real rightlaw” seventy-fourth of the provisions of the analysis, and to improve the terms oftheir own proposals.
The full text is divided into four chapters.
The first chapter is m ainly about the current residential parking spaces, garageownership of the five views, the first view is the area allocated, said that it should bein accordance with the district parking spaces, garage construction area is included inthe area of the pool area as a judge of parking spaces, garage management authority.
The second point is the owners said, the said that the ownership of residentialparking spaces, garage all the owners of residential total, residential parking spaces,garage can be regarded as accessory part of the residential buildings, with the entirebuilding and in conjunction with transfer to residential property owners a total. Thethird view is that the parties agreed that the parties can agree to the sale, leasing andother ways to the parking spaces, garage ownership, namely the law to g ive theowners agreed parking spaces, garage ownership rights. The fourth view is all thedevelopers said that the said that res idential parking spaces, garage ownership shallbelong to all develop ers, and parking spaces, garage can b ecome the object of theindependent, can separate transactions, rather than as accessory to res with transferand transfer. The fifth view is that the state said that only for the air defense garage,refers to the area of the air defense garage is an important national military facilities,not by the individual to enjoy its ownershi p, the ownership of the garage should bethe state of the coun try. The author of these five views, c ombined with the soc ialstatus of the five points of view of the advantages and disadvantages of theevaluation, and put forward the author's views and views.
The second chapter mainly through the comparative study of the m ethod, andthe analysis of Japan, the United States, Germany, France, Taiwan of china, China Macaoarea, the area of residential parkin g spaces, garage ownership of legislation an dtheory, and the theo ry of the classification and analy sis, summed up threemanagement authority model, the first mode is by residential parking spaces, garageby the developers of all models, the use of the model of the state, the district parkingspaces, garage as a proprietary right, and in accordance with the requirements of theowners, respectively, to sell or rent. In such a model, residential property owners inthe purchase of housing developers have the option to purchase parking spaces. Thesecond model is a common model of residential parking spaces, garage by residentialowners. The model is generally used in two forms, one, by the owners of residentialparking spaces, a total of the garage, th e owner of the exclusive part of theownership of parking spaces, a total of the garage. Second, the resid ential propertyowners to share the right to use the parking lot, the need to use parking spaces,garage owners in the paym ent of a certa in fee, you can get the exclusive use ofparking spaces, garage. The third m odel is to determ ine the classification ofresidential parking spaces, garage owne rship model, Japan and China' s Taiwanregion generally use this m odel. Different countries and regions have their ownadvantages and disadvantages, and it is not suitable for our country . Through theelaboration of this chapter, I hope that we can provide some ideas and examples forthe settlement of the disputes of the ownership of parking space and garage, and canbe used for reference in our country.
In the third chapter, the analysis and research on the ownership of residentialparking space. From the definition and type of residential parking spaces, garage, thepaper discusses the ownership of parking space and garage from the view of buildingdistinction ownership. First of all, the residential parking spaces, garage connotationand type of analysis and analysis, generall y divided into four types: ground parkingspaces, underground garage, aerial layer parking spaces, air defense garage. The fourdifferent types of parking space an d garage, its legal natu re is not th e same, thispaper from the perspective of independe nce angle, res f rom the angle and theeconomic benefits of the legal nature of the parking spaces, garage the ownership ofresidential parking spaces, garage were th eoretical analysis. Secondly, this chapteranalyzes the historical background and the th eory of the building of the distinctionbetween the ownership system . With the residential by horizontally aligned to thevertical stacking evolution, condominium ownership system bred and, generallydivided into three kinds of theories, “monism”, “dualism” and “three yuan theory”. Inthe end, the concept and content of the syst em of building distinction ownership areintroduced, which includes the exclusive right, the right of owne rship and the rightof membership. China's current “Real right law” for the building to distingu ishbetween the system of residential parking spaces, garage ownership of the provisionsof the problem is not clear , clear, widely criticized, there are many problems in theactual operation. On the basis of the relevant concepts of the system of buildingdistinction ownership, the author discusse s the ownership of residential parkingspace and garage, which is of great significance to improve the relevant provisionsof the “Real right law”.
The fourth chapter is mainly on the residential parking spaces, garageownership system in practice. “Real right law” seventy-fourth first time on theresidential area parking, garage ownership of the problem of the principle definition,but this principle of the definition to th e judicial practice has brought a lot ofunderstanding and application of the problem. “Real right law” in the first time in theform of legislation in the form of residential parking spaces, garage ownership rules,but the law is not perfect, the author first analyzes the advantages and disadvantagesof the reform, to find out the problem , and then gradually anal yze its defects. For“should first meet the needs of owners” interpretation, how to “meet the needs of theowners” to define, to dete rmine the ownership of the agreement to express theirviews on the “other venues”, the concept of the “Real right law” in the final analysisof their views. , of course, an im portant purpose of the theoretical research is toguide the practice, I hope through this chapter of an analysis and discussion can playa valuable role, let the ownership of residential parking spaces, garage to get m oreattention.
[Key Words] The car parking zone; Garage; Ownership;Real right law
目 录
导 言
一、问题的提出
二、研究价值及意义
三、文献综述
四、主要研究方法
五、论文结构
六、论文主要创新及不足
第一章 小区车位、车库权属的观点及评析
第一节 小区车位、车库权属的观点
一、面积分摊说
二、业主共有说
三、当事人约定说
四、开发商所有说
五、国家所有说
第二节 小区车位、车库权属观点的评析
第二章 小区车位、车库权属的立法及学说
第一节 境外立法考察
一、日本
二、美国
三、德国
四、法国
五、我国台湾地区
六、我国澳门地区
第二节 对境外立法模式的比较分析
一、开发商拥有小区车位、车库的模式
二、小区业主共有车位、车库的模式
三、分类确定小区车位、车库权属的模式
第三章 小区车位、车库权属的法律定位
第一节 小区车位、车库的内涵与类型
一、小区车位、车库的内涵
二、小区车位、车库的类型
第二节 小区车位、车库的法律定位
一、小区车位、车库是否具有独立性
二、小区车位、车库是否为从物
三、从经济效益角度看小区车位、车库的权属问题
第四章 小区车位、车库权属的实务研究
第一节 对我国《物权法》第七十四条的理解与适用
一、《物权法》第七十四条的优点与缺点
二、“首先满足业主需要”的规定应当如何理解
三、如何理解“其他场地”
四、如何理解以“约定”的方式来确定权属
第二节 完善小区车位、车库权属争议的建议
一、完善相关的法律规定
二、完善不动产的登记制度
三、加强相关行政部门的监管力度
结 语
参考文献
