摘要
物权法第202条的规定,在司法实践中引起了一定的争议,从不同的理念出发可以做出不同的解释,因对法律理解的不统一导致的同案异判现象,在某种程度上有损法律的权威。在理论界,抵押权的存续期间也是个见仁见智的问题。将抵押权存续期间视为除斥期间产生失权的效果,可以最大限度地化解物权法第202条规定带来的实践问题,也符合立法的价值取向。除此以外,物权法第202条还有其它问题值得探讨。
The provisions in the Article 202 of the Property Law have aroused controversies in judicial practice. Due to the different interpretations under different ideas, the judgments on the same case may be diverse and thereby undermine the authority of law. In the theoretical circle, different people have different views on the period of continued existence about mortgage. Regarding the period of continued existence as scheduled period results in loss of power, which will not only maximally solve the practical problems brought about by the Article 202. but also accord with the valt,es of legislation. In addition, there are some other issues in the Article 202 requiring discussion.
出处
《贵州警官职业学院学报》
2013年第5期76-81,共6页
Journal of Guizhou Police Officer Vocational College
