Research On Legal Problems Of The Fructus

Fructus, as one of the most basic concepts in Civil Law, has frequently emerged in thelegislations. However, in terms of its connotation, there still has not been authoritativedefinition. Furthermore, all the explanations of civil-law textbooks and the theoretical studieson its concept are still quite rare and even mutually contradictory. Meanwhile, the relativedispersion of legislations and the conflicts among them have brought heavy barriers to thejudgment of ownership of fructus in judicial practices. Therefore, in order to solve theseproblems, this essay will conduct systematic and comprehensive analysis of the definition ofits concept, the principles ascription and the application of related laws.This essay mainly includes four parts:After the systematically and comprehensively historical analysis and comparative studieson its concept, the first part discusses the conditions of fructus-identification in details. Eventhough fructus is one kind of proceeds, not all the proceeds are fruits, because the wrongunderstanding that fruits are equivalent to proceeds disturbs the harmony of conceptualsystem. On the other hand, fructus civiles is also the result of a wrong legal fiction, as itcannot realize the harmony of binary system between Real Rights and Creditor’s Right andthe function of fructus──to identify the ownership of objects.The second part mainly discusses the principles of ascription about fructus. Afterintroducing the original doctrine and the production principle about how to identify theownership of fructus naturales, this essay offers in-depth analysis on the theories and valuesbehind the two principles. Finally, this essay argues that the original doctrine is the reflectionof the Sacred Principles of Ownership. While, in an era of resource scarcity, much moreemphases should be put on the production principle to encourage labor creation.The third part expounds several kinds of special circumstances, like unauthorizedpossession, severability of contract and the circumstance where fruits fall into adjacent land.According to this essay, the Property Law of our country should endow the bona fidepossessor with the right to obtain the fructus because only giving the bona fide possessor theright to request the necessary expenses cannot efficiently balance the interests of both theparties. Meanwhile, in specific circumstances, the malicious possessor should be endowed with this same kind of right to encourage labor creation. Similarly, the bona fidepossessor should be also accessible to this right in circumstances where the contract is invalid,revoked or terminated in order to enhance the protection of their interests. Finally, it issuggested that the problem about the fruits in the adjacent land be solved by reference for thepractice in the Swiss──the neighbor can be allowed to possess the fruits if he/she allows thebranches of fruit trees to stretch out above his/her land.The fourth part mainly analyzes and evaluates our country’s current legislations aboutfructus. In fact, our current rules about fructus are dispensed in several legislations, mainlyincluding the Property Law, Contract Law, Commercial Bank Law and the related judicialinterpretations. According to this essay, the article116of the Property Law confines thesubjects of ownership of fructus to a quite limited range and it should adopt one kind ofelastic expression.The fifth part discusses the application of fructus-related laws in judicial practices in ourcountry. In fact, in terms of the sales of title retention and real property transactions, there isno conflict between the article116of Property Law and the article163of Contract Law.Because the former is applicable to the circumstances where the transaction fails, while thelatter is applicable to the cases where the transaction is successfully achieved. Finally, in thesublease contract without authorization, only the acknowledgment of the validity of contractcan balance the interests between both the parties.