关于我国民法时效制度的完善.pdfVIP

提 要 时效制度作为古罗马的法律遗产 被大陆法系国家所继 承 英美法系国家为解决静态权利的归属和动态权利的交易 安全 也异曲同工地规定了反向占有制度和起诉期限法 我 国受原苏俄民法的影响 只规定了单一的时效制度即诉讼时 效制度 出于时效制度协调性的内在要求以及暗合物尽其用 的时代潮流 未来的民法典势在必行地创设取得时效制度 率先突破的司法实践亦起着助推剂的作用 另一方面 我国 虽有诉讼时效制度 但客体范围较为笼统 导致司法实务容 易产生分歧 为解决这一问题 首先应将物权请求权从民事 侵权的责任方式中分化出来 与债 权请求权同属于请求权系 列 再根据物权请求权的特性将返还原物请求权和恢复原状 请求权列入消灭时效的客体范围 与债权人一样 当物权人 怠于行使权利 必然要付出丧失支配权的代价 反之会使消 灭时效制度的价值受到破坏 为维护登记的绝对效力 登记 的不动产和动产不予适用消灭时效 至于有学者担心 返还 原物请求权适用消灭时效 会产生 权利虚化 问题 这种 担心是不必要的 物权请求权消灭而物权仍存在如同债权请 求权消灭而债权仍存在一样 后者却没有引起理论界的忧 虑 任何一项法律制度的适用与否 应从这项制度的价值出 发 而不是从结果反向推导 其次 调整时效期间和明确时 效期间的起算 衔接时效利益的主张与证据规则的运用 使 时效制度更具精细化和可操作化 ABSTRACT The time limitation or prescription rule is succeeded to Civil Law Countries from ancient Rome as a legal legacy. The Common Law Countries, on the other hand, has also enacted adverse possession rule and Limitation Act to regulate the attribution of static rights and the transaction safety. Affected by the Russian Civil law, Chinese law has only prescribed limitation of action. In order to follow the inherent harmonization requirement of prescription rule and the epoch tide of making the best use of everything, the future Chinese civil code should ordain the acquisitive prescription rule. And the judicatory practice has taking the lead in the application of acquisitive prescription. On the other hand, although there is a rule of time limitation of action, the range of the prescription object is so general that bifurcation is easily aroused in practice. To settle this issue, firstly we should separate the right of claim for real rights from the tort liabilities, and juxtapose it with the right of claim for creditors rights. Secondly, we should join the claim for restitution and the claim for replacement into th