A Study On The Protection Of Real Right In The Registration Of Real Estate

House is foundation of people’s living, which has tremendous economic value and is the most important personal wealth in the society. On March 1st, 2015, the Provisional Regulations on Real Estate Registration has been carried out, which is aimed to regulate the behavior of real estate registration and maintain the security of real estate transactions. However, there are a large number of contracts for borrowing others names to buy house and register rights in practice. The two parties have reached a consensus privately. One party who provides his name is called registered rights holder. As a matter of fact, the other side is the real buyer, who has the rights of owning, disposing the house and so on. As a consequence, the register right is not corresponding to its actual state. In other words, the legal property right is separated from the real property right. This kind of contracts not only brings significant risks to the both party, but also destroys the order of real estate registration and damages transaction security. Therefore, it is necessary to determine the validity of the contract and the ownership of the house. In addition, demonstrative principle of real rights in China’s Property Law is beneficial to bona fides third party. But the protection is inadequate to the real right holder. This paper is aimed to protect and assist these people.About the effectiveness of the contract, opinions are completely opposite both in theory and practice. There are also disputes over each point inside. This paper bases on the relevant provisions of contract law, in order to response different views on the effectiveness of contracts. In practice, one kind of behaviors might exist for a long time and be prevalent. If laws prescribe all these behaviors invalid, not only cannot prevent these behaviors from happening again, but also lead to more disputes over the rights and obligations of the parties, as lack of a clear direction. In case there is no invalid condition, the author is inclined to think these contracts valid.About the ownership of the house, there are also two kinds of views, to nominal holder or the real right holder. The property law does not absorb the real right behavior from German, also does not recognize real right behavior non-causative nature, so the effectiveness of the real right change depends on the cause of the behavior, which is the effectiveness of the contract signed by both sides. Under the circumstance of different opinions about the effectiveness of the contract, the views on the ownership of the house are certainly divided. In the case of the contract is considered valid, if the nominal holder does not transfer the house to the third party in good faith, the author tends to think the real right holder is the owner. We cannot regard the real estate register records as the absolute basis to judge the ownership of the real estate.