Theory Of Stolen Goods In Good

It is commonly believed that Bona fide acquisition originated from Germanic method (Hand muss Hand wahren) principle. The purpose of the system is to protect the safety of transactions and deal with the ownership of possessions acquired by good faith. With the rapid development of modern market economy, trades are becoming more and more frequent and people are becoming more and more aware of the safety of transactions. The system of Bona fide acquisition shows increasingly importance in protecting the third person in good faith, maintain the safety of the trade, and promote the effective utilization of goods.In our country, however, the system has only existed in the theoretical discussion of the scholars and judicial practice for a long time. The law did not explicitly state it. In2007. The Property Law provided special provisions to achieve the bona fide acquisition legislation. Unfortunately, the law skirted around spoils acquired in good faith, which is the most difficult part of the bona fide acquisition."Stolen goods" have the "spoils" nature just because of its illegal source. They and the common goods have no physical and commercial differences in nature. The third person who is in good faith trades based on the public credulity, which is legal. If the stolen goods cannot be acquired in good faith, then the trade security and market order will be harmed. This paper starts out from the basic theory of bona fide acquisition and the related concepts of stolen goods, combines with Germany, France and China’s Taiwan area legislative cases, and justifies the reason of the system of bona fide of acquisition of stolen goods. By this, this article tries to perfect our country’s bona fide acquisition system. It contains the following four parts:Firstly, starting out from the basics of the system of bona fide acquisition, this part points out that the cause of the development of the bona fide acquisition is the demands of the time due to the economic development, by analyzing the related concepts, constitutive requirements, the history and theoretical basis of it. The aim is to protect the third person in good faith and the safety of trades. As to the various theories of bona fide acquisition, the author believes that the right theory is the most reasonable.Secondly, to define the scope of the stole goods, determine its nature and investigate the legislations of it in other countries. What is stolen goods and its nature are two important issues in determining whether the stolen goods can be acquired in good faith. Itcan be known that the stolen goods which can be acquired through good faith should be limited to the goods which is acquired through robbery, theft, fraud and embezzlement, which are against the real intention of the holder. To analyze in the market circulation perspective, the stolen goods and common goods have the same properties and function. Whether the stolen goods can be acquired through good faith and to what level, there are four kinds of legislation, namely completely negative, eliminate negative, eliminate applicable and completely applicable.The third chapter, this part analyzes the necessity of adoption of bona fide acquisition of stolen goods of our country. This part first analyzes several representative opinions against the bona fide acquisition of stolen goods and point out their weakness, so they cannot be reasonable in practice, although they have some supportive opinions. And then, it justifies the reasons of adoption of bona fide acquisition of stolen goods, namely, it is in accord with the legal’s justice idea and good for trade safety and our country’s socialist legal construction. Through the analysis of both positive and negative aspects of the system, it justifies the adoption of the system in our country.The fourth chapter, build our country’s bona fide acquisition of stolen goods and perfect the system of bona fide acquisition, under the comprehensive consideration of the purpose of the system, other countries’ legislation and our country’s specific conditions. To be specific, the movable properties of stolen goods should be applied to bona fide acquisition, but real estate is not applicable and the right of reply claim should not be adopted. Finally, the author bravely assumes the detailed legal statements of bona fide acquisition of stolen goods in our country in the future.