Whethertherealrinhtcliamisapplicable For The Limitation Of Action Or No

Since China’s current legislation on prescription system is not perfect, neither theAcquisitive prescription is not made on time and did not make a distinction between theprovisions of the Real Right and the elimination of creditor claims timeliness; Thus, evenin our countries not only law theory and judicial practice, on the claim of the right todestroy limitation applies whether there have been no small controversy, summed up thevarious theories assert that negative to say and compromise, say for sure.Currently, the nature of the claim of the right of property, there are three theories,Property said,Creditors said and Prospective creditors said, I believe that the nature of theclaim of the right should adopt the third doctrine. Therefore, even if the applicable claim ofthe right to destroy aging issues in the academic community, there are three theoreticalcontroversy, but according to the nature of the claim of the right and the particularity ofreal estate registration, the author based in favor of the adoption of the compromise, saidthe view that our property law on the return of the original claims, and eliminate the dangerof prejudice to exclude claims for personal property and real estate unregistered shouldeliminate the statute of limitations, the proposed future legislature promulgated relevantjudicial interpretation to be clear.