约定抵押物不得转让的法律效果——对《民法典》第406条及相关司法解释的解读与反思

The Legal Effect of Agreeing That the Mortgaged Property Shall Not Be Transferred—Interpretation and Reflection on Article 406 of the Civil Code and Related Judicial Interpretations

摘要: 抵押物转让一直是民法学界和实务界重点关注的问题。长期以来，我国一直是采禁止抵押物转让的立场。但是《民法典》第406条第1款一改往日立场，抵押期间允许抵押人自由处分抵押物。然而紧随其后的但书，又为当事人意思自治打开了口子。更令人费解的是《〈民法典〉担保制度司法解释》第43条对于约定登记的规定，究竟是为当事人正确适用法律指明了方向，还是加深了疑惑，有待于学界的解释。本文立足于《民法典》第406条及相关司法解释的规定，认为有必要区分不动产和动产，区别适用。

Abstract: The transfer of mortgage has always been the focus of civil law and practice circles. For a long time, China has adopted the position of forbidding the transfer of mortgage prop-erty. However, Article 406 (1) of the Civil Code changes the previous position and allows the mort-gagor to dispose of the mortgaged property freely during the mortgage period. However, the proviso followed by the party opened the opening for the autonomy of will. What is more puzzling is wheth-er Article 43 of the Judicial Interpretation of Guarantee System in the Civil Code points out the di-rection of the correct application of law for the parties concerned or deepens the doubts, which re-mains to be interpreted by the academic circle. Based on Article 406 of the Civil Code and the rele-vant judicial interpretation, this paper believes that it is necessary to distinguish real property and personal property and apply them differently.