所有权保留的形式主义与功能主义路径讨论

A Discussion on Formalist and Functionalist Approaches to Retention of Title

摘要: 所有权保留制度在《民法典》中的设计体现了形式主义与功能主义的杂糅。形式主义路径坚持所有权保留中出卖人享有真实所有权，强调物权法定与体系一致性；功能主义路径则从实质出发，将所有权保留定性为非典型担保，以实现债权优先受偿的目的。通过比较两种担保观的法律效力以及论证思路，在标的物处分和取回权解释方面，功能主义担保观都更具优势。且形式主义担保观的传统支持理论，即物权法定与区分原则、民法典体系一致性、制度背景不适配等理由，也都存在瑕疵。故相较而言，功能主义担保观更符合当前的法律发展趋势。

Abstract: The design of the retention of title system in the Civil Code reflects a hybrid of formalist and functionalist approaches. The formalist approach insists that the seller retains genuine ownership under retention of title, emphasizing the statutory nature of property rights and systemic consistency. In contrast, the functionalist approach, proceeding from substantive considerations, characterizes retention of title as an atypical security interest, aiming to achieve the purpose of priority in debt satisfaction. By comparing the legal effects and reasoning of these two perspectives on security, the functionalist view demonstrates greater advantages in explaining the disposition of the subject matter and the interpretation of the right of repossession. Furthermore, the traditional arguments supporting the formalist view—such as the statutory nature of property rights and the principle of separation, the consistency of the Civil Code system, and incompatibility with the institutional context—are also flawed. Therefore, comparatively speaking, the functionalist perspective aligns more closely with current trends in legal development.