| The right of habitation originated in Roman law, and constituted the legal framework of servitudes personarum in Roman law with usus and usufruct. Subsequently many countries stipulated the right of habitation system by the impact of Roman law. However, it is noteworthy that Japan, China Taiwan, Korea and other countries or regions did not inherit this system in the process of the introduction of western law. The traditional right of habitation was applied in the marriage and family relations of the continental law with the characteristics of ethical, personal, non-transferable, etc, because the initial purpose of its establishment was to support and relief to specific social groups. However, with the socio-economic development, the social contradiction between the scarcity of land resources and the growing population is aggravated, the use of housing is diversified, and this is also the product of the inevitable result of economic development. In addition to the reservation of the right of habitation for the social purpose with traditional relief functions in the field of marriage and family, the right of habitation for the investment purpose has appeared taking protection of the interests of owners into account. The development of the right of habitation essentially reflects a transformation from personal rights to property rights. It is regrettable that the "property law" did not legistated the right of habitation. Today, with the further development of theories of human rights, the emergence of market economy, and the surging tide of urbanization, more and more attention is paid to the right of habitation and the debate on its future in the academic community is till going on. Faced with the outstanding problems of the reality of China, as well as the legislative and judicial issues, its absent in the property law today is really a shortcoming, so China's legislation should establish the right of habitation system. By inspecting on the cases of national legislation and the practical social life of our country, the author, on the base of broadening the research perspective, clearly points out that the right of habitation does not only include the right of habitation for the social purpose, but also include the right of habitation for the investment purpose, which is seen as more widely useful for modern society. Furthermore, the author demonstrates the necessity and feasibility of the establishment of this system, and further points out the specific ideas about the establishment of the right of habitation system in our legislation. |
