非借名“名实不符”房产之执行异议之诉审判路径的实证分析
An Empirical Analysis of the Trial Path of Execution Objection Litigation for Non-Registered Property with “Mismatched Name and Reality”
摘要: 在执行过程中,非借名“名实不符”房产引发的执行异议之诉,长期类推适用《异议复议规定》第28、29条作为主要裁判依据,但法条实则难以满足裁判之需。并且,在最高人民法院发布的指导案例下,法律适用规则被打破致使类案法律适用混乱不堪,类案裁判思维亦因缺乏统一规范而逐渐偏离制度逻辑,走向区域差异化。因此,可以法教义学为指导,从贴合社会发展实际,凸显保护案外人生存居住之需着手,构建执行异议之诉的排除执行规则。同时,梳理执行异议之诉的原有制度之逻辑与目的,着眼于明晰责任财产范围规范审判思路。
Abstract: During the enforcement process, for enforcement objection lawsuits arising from properties that are not “mismatched name and reality” under a false name, Articles 28 and 29 of the “Regulations on Objection and Reconsideration” have long been applied by analogy as the main basis for judgment. However, the legal provisions are actually difficult to meet the needs of judgment, and under the guiding cases issued by the Supreme People’s Court, the rules for the application of the law have been broken, resulting in a chaotic application of the law in similar cases. Furthermore, the thinking of similar case judgments has gradually deviated from the institutional logic due to the lack of unified norms and moved towards regional differentiation. Therefore, under the guidance of legal doctrine, starting from aligning with the actual situation of social development and highlighting the need to protect the survival and residence of third parties, the exclusion rules for the execution of execution objection lawsuits can be constructed. At the same time, it sorts out the logic and purpose of the original system of the lawsuit for objection to execution, focusing on clarifying the scope of liability property and standardizing the trial thinking.
文章引用:张立新. 非借名“名实不符”房产之执行异议之诉审判路径的实证分析[J]. 法学, 2025, 13(7): 1445-1454. https://doi.org/10.12677/ojls.2025.137203

参考文献

[1] 马开轩. 商品房买卖消费者物权期待权适用困境与纾解[J]. 河南财经政法大学学报, 2024, 39(5): 21-30.
[2] 王泽鉴. 人格权法——法释义学、比较法、案例研究[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2013: 11-22.
[3] (德)拉伦茨. 法学方法论[M]. 陈爱娥, 译. 北京: 商务印书馆, 2003: 77.
[4] 凌斌. 什么是法教义学: 一个法哲学追问[J]. 中外法学, 2015, 27(1): 224-244.
[5] 张翔. 形式法治与法教义学[J]. 法学研究, 2012, 34(6): 6-9.
[6] 王彬. 法教义学的自主性与本土化[J]. 法治研究, 2024(6): 3-14.
[7] 卜元石. 法教义学的显性化与作为方法的法教义学[J]. 南大法学, 2020(1): 49-80.
[8] [德]弗里茨·鲍尔, 霍尔夫·施蒂尔纳, 亚历山大·布伦斯. 德国强制执行法(下册) [M]. 王洪亮, 郝丽燕, 译. 北京: 法律出版社, 2020: 176.
[9] 杜万华. 最高人民法院民事审判第一庭 民事审判指导与参考[M]. 北京: 人民法院出版社, 2015: 160-163.
[10] 占善刚. 民事诉讼中的程序异议权研究[J]. 法学研究, 2017, 39(2): 113-131.
[11] 张卫平. 民事诉讼法[M]. 北京: 法律教育出版社, 2019: 588-589.
[12] 郭小冬. 执行异议制度的异化与回归[J]. 法治研究, 2022(4): 62-70.
[13] 魏晓旭. 中国保障生存权的实践逻辑和话语阐释[J]. 人权, 2023(4): 12-33.
[14] 张卫平. 民事执行基本原则: 构成要求与体系——以《民事强制执行法》的制定为中心[J]. 北方法学, 2023, 17(1): 5-16.
[15] 司伟. 借名买房排除强制执行的法律规则——基于学说与案例的分析与展开[J]. 法治研究, 2021(4): 32-46.
[16] 姚辉, 阙梓冰. 不动产隐名权利的私法保护——以案外人执行异议之诉为视角[J]. 中国人民大学学报, 2021, 35(2): 125-134.