On The Study Of The Lost Property

It occurred that people lost vested things in the process of the creation of wealth, even we were careful enough to prevent the loss of articles, but we can not absolutely prevent it. As early as in Roman law, it stipulated something about Lost Property legal system, and most countries have stipulated the Lost Property legal system too at present. Lost Property is movable property that is owned by someone but not occupied by anyone else. The Lost Property System is to adjust the legal relations about the Lost Property ownership. China's "Civil Code" only in section 79 provides the Lost Property legal system. In the "Property Law" adopted by the Fifth Plenary Session of the Tenth National People's Congress in March 2007, the Lost Property on the existing legal system was improved. It stipulated the attribution of the lost property, pickers' obligation, confirmed the effectiveness of reward advertising, necessary expenses claim, acquired in good faith system and other related legal issues,which should be affirmed. But it only made some macro-regulations, which should be further standardized.This paper reviews a lot of Lost Property system-related information and the latest research results in theoretical circles. And we think that China's "Property Law" on the Lost Property system requires that there are still shortcomings. First, the lost property that no one claimed at last returned to the State has become an issue. Which State department should the lost property be handed to? How the State should deal with them? Pickers, and management authorities can charge "necessary cost" claim, but the scope of what costs are necessary expenses in the end did not provide in it. There are no stipulated measurable criteria of the necessary expenses' amount, whether based on the value of the lost property or on the length of time that the pickers preserve the lost property or the expenditure to preserve it. Secondly, the pickers' rights and obligations are highly uneven. Protection of the rights of the pickers of the provisions has not been reflected. Finally, what civil obligations the pickers or department should bear when they cause the lost property's damage or loss due to gross negligence or intentional infliction is not clear. As for the administrative, criminal liability's recognition would require a longer time to explore. In this paper, we investigated the problems that exist in the Lost Property system, started with the basic theoretical research, considered the foreign-related legislation and the legislation and practice of China's Lost Property system. Then gave the correct evaluation of the existing law's and "Property Law" provisions' problems on the Lost Property system, and then put forward some sound advice.Paper is divided into three parts:Part I, identify Lost Property and related concepts. First the concept of Lost Property and constitute elements, on this basis will be to distinguish between Lost Property and forgotten objects. The text is based on the study of the concept. If even the most basic definition can not be clearly identified, then the follow-up study will be without a stable foundation, withstand scrutiny. In this paper, we listed many scholars' definition of Lost Property, analyzed them, and concluded author's own view. As for the distinction between Lost Property and forgotten things, I believe that in addition to the definition to distinguish between the two, but also in criminal law and civil law provisions to make a distinction between the two. In the "Criminal Law", Lost Property should be incorporated into the specification of the object to Embezzlement, or occupation Lost Property may also be committing the Embezzlement. However, in the "Civil Code" for the distinction between the two provisions should be made that when picking up Lost Property may request reward, but you can not ask reward when picking up forgotten things. Also in this section explores the identification of the Lost Property-related party and the Picking Up behavior.Part II and part III, Pickers' rights and obligations.In the Lost Property relevant legal provisions, the laws in many countries are committed to achieve the "restitution" and "make the best use of ideal with rational allocation of rights and obligations, and given Pickers reimbursement claim, compensation claim and right to obtain the lost property's ownership on condition. Chinese law provides for the Pickers a lot of obligations. As for the Pickers' rights, our law considered that returning lost property to its owner is the basic ethical requirements such as "Returning lost money". So, it only provides the Pickers the reimbursement claim for needed cost, but not giving him the right to compensation requests and right to obtain the lost property's ownership on condition. But provides when the Lost Property unclaimed the property owned by the state. This section demonstrates the shortcomings of such a provision. First it would cause a serious imbalance between rights and obligations, while such a provision is not conducive to the realization, "restitution" and "make the best use of legislative intent. So, it is my firm belief that our laws should give Pickers the right to claim compensation and the right to obtain the lost property's ownership on condition. The scope and amount of remuneration are also discussed in this section.Part IV, the effect of the Picker's disposing the lost property. This section mainly discusses whether the Pickers can obtain ownership of lost property by the Usucapio system when the Pickers do not fulfill their legal obligations, but keep the lost property to themselves and use or dispose them. As well as, whether the Acquisition System can be applicable on this condition. What responsibilities the Pickers should bear when they do not fulfill their legal obligations is already clearly stipulated in our Tort Law; therefore, this article will no longer be discussed. Usucapio system is not suitable for China's national conditions. It does not match China's Millennium Inheritance Ethics; therefore it should not be stipulated in China's legislation. But in order to balance the rights and obligations between the owner of the lost property and the Assignee in good faith, in order to protect the dynamic trading security, it's worth of recognition to confirm Acquisition System in our legislation.