Have The Right To Dispose Of Behavior

Have no right to dispose of a common phenomenon in social life, its broadscope, such as unjust enrichment, the good faith, the contracting fault liability and soon a series of legal relationship. Has no right to dispose of another profession widelydebate topic, its no matter in theory or in practice, is worthy of further researchsignificance, the paper will be based on the analysis and on the concept and theory ofour country has no right to dispose of the right to dispose of comb to get to knowwhat is "no", what is a "disposition", to clarify the concept of thus obtained the rightto dispose of the concept and the value of the system, through the analysis of itsconcept, can find its confused concept, the author will also be the concept proposedown view, for the right to dispose of the concept in understanding. Then we willdiscuss the right to dispose of and related concepts. Purpose is to clear in all cases,the right to dispose of what is the status, we will system this paper gives the bonafide acquisition, and has no right to dispose of unjust enrichment, negotiorum gestiothese three concepts. Have no right to dispose of behavior and relationship of unjustenrichment system, is very common in trading. And, because the right to dispose ofbehavior being paid impermanence and legal reasons, and there is a third person ingood faith the malicious, not only makes itself to have the right to dispose of theeffectiveness and the rights and interests of a third person changes, more make theright to dispose the relationship between behavior and unjust enrichment systemsplendor. Has no right to dispose of and is closely related to good faith, even theright to dispose of is the premise of good faith, both because of the protection objectis different, the conflict is to be reckoned with. In this paper is with the concept ofnegotiorum gestio relationship, have the right to dispose of and negotiorum gestio inconcept is often confused sometimes, can differentiate between the two. Afterthrough the theory of carding, said to null and void, with pending validity andeffective of. Three kinds of theories are respectively corresponding to the differentreal right change mode. In the legislation of real right change mode has no right to dispose of the comparison, has no right to dispose of is closely related to the realright change, here is mainly to property rights formalism represented by Germanyreal right change mode, represented by the French meaning of creditor’s rights realright change mode and the creditor’s rights formalism represented by real rightchange mode, Austria respectively are analyzed in this paper. Is analysis of ourcountry has no right to dispose of the legislative status quo, respectively from twoaspects of "contract law" and "property law" to discuss research. Mainly to article51of "contract law", explain3and analyzes the "property law" article106to researchand analyze our country present stage has no right to dispose of the legislative statusquo and existing problems. Is for the improvement of the system of right to disposeof some views and ideas. In clearly has no right to dispose of the effectiveness, howto coordinate the conflicts of have the right to dispose of and good faith, theperfection of the relief of the other party in good faith and puts forward someopinions and Suggestions.In this paper, by using the method of comparative analysis and deductivereasoning methods discussed such to have the right to dispose of system, mainly inorder to define the right to dispose of the concept, and its effect in the real rightchange mode of regulation, and analyzes the real right change mode, this paperdiscusses the understanding of explain three at the same time, in the final proposedto the system of our country has no right to dispose of the perfect view.