浅析形式便民与实质利民之冲突_0.docVIP

浅析形式便民与实质利民之冲突 摘要：在物权法的起草、审议过程中，我国立法、司法界及其学者一直就不动产登记前是否应经公证进行实质性审查一事进行争论。日前，全国人大 法律 委员会在向全国人大常委会作关于《中华人民共和国物权法（草案）》修改情况汇报时，提出了不宜作出必须公证规定的意见，指出：“ 法律委员会 研究 认为，为了便民，办理不动产登记只需一道手续，并且逐步实行统一登记，草案对此已经作了规定，并明确规定办理不动产登记不得按照标的收费。不动产登记前是否办理公证，可以由当事人自愿选择。如果办理登记前必须经过公证，不仅不便民，还会增加群众负担。因此，不宜规定不动产登记前必须经过公证。”。 关键词：形式便民；实质利民；实际效果 Abstract: In the reality of laws drafts, in the consideration process, our country legislates, the judicial world and the scholar continuously before the real estate registration whether should pass through the notarization to carry on the substantive examination incident to carry on the argument. The other day, National People’s Congress Legal committee when does to the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress “(Draft) revises the debriefing debrief about the People’s Republic of China Reality of laws”, proposed is not suitable makes must the notarization stipulation opinion, pointed out: “the Legal committee studies believed that to be convenient, handles the real estate registration only to need a procedure, and implements the unification registration gradually, the draft had made regarding this already the stipulation, and stipulated explicitly handles the real estate registration not to according to the sighting target charge. Whether before the real estate registration, to handle the notarization, may choose voluntarily by the litigant. If before handling the registration, to pass through the notarization, is not only inconvenient, will also increase the populace to bear. Therefore, before is not suitable stipulates the real estate registration, to pass through the notarization.”. key word: The form is convenient; Substantive favorable people; Actual result 前言 显然，法律委员会提出不宜规定必须公证的本意，一是为了便民，二是为了不增加群众负担；其目的归纳起来是为了“利民”。那么物权法不规定不动产登记应经公证进行实质审查，是否会真正达到利民的效果呢？我认为，物权法作出不动产登记不须公证或自愿公证的规定，只是形式上的便民或利民，实质上则对保护人民群众的利益和维护 社会 的稳定十分不利，其结果会与人大法律委员会提出此意见的初衷背道而驰。 一、不动产登记前不经公证，不利于房产交易活动中购房人真实意思的表示 就社会交易活动的一般情况而言，法律法规对交易行为不设置诸如审查、核准、许可、登记等前置性条件，无疑将有利于提高交