A Study On Legal Structure Of Investment Model Of Hypothesized Property Shops

The solving idea for disputes on hypothesized property shops in the existinglegal precedents only give the strain interpretation so as to obtain the finalconclusions and the ultimate goal is to protect the investor rights and maybe themechanism choice is vicarious. In the aspect of right nature determination,it isregarded as joint ownership or condominium ownership by most legal precedents.However,through the analysis on characteristics of joint ownership and condominiumownership, it is obtained that the hypothesized property shop is not equipped with thelegal attributes of them. In addition, even though the above-mentioned right naturedetermination has theoretical foundation, the damage compensation mode should notbe used instead of the typical property right protection mode that can be realizedwhen protecting investor rights. Due to the inappropriate solving ideas for legalprecedent, the legal relation between investor and proprietor in such investmentmodel is analyzed through the trust relation principle in this thesis ln order to provideeffective solutions for the protection on investor interests an.d help solving suchdisputes.The trust property scope almost includes all the property rights required by lawand the hypothesized property shop can be the object of real right in the valueattribute of object because it has the connotation of object, therefore, it can be trustproperty. If the relation between investor and proprietor is determined as trust relation,the lease contract or entrusted operation contract between them should be regarded astrust agreement. Through the analysis on the identifying elements of trust agreementfrom formal elements and substantial elements, it is obtained that lease contract orentrusted operation contract signed between the investor and proprietor conforms toidentifying elements of trust agreement. On this premise, through the analysis on thetwo types of contracts, it is found that they two lose the substantive characteristicsand it is similar to the function of trust agreement instead of the original function.Hence, the legal relation between investor and proprietor is equal to the trust legal relation in the aspect of function. There are different opinions on the ownershipattribution of trust property,which will be discussed and analyzed in this thesis. It isfirmly believed that under the investment model of hypothesized property shop, theinvestor right is the beneficial right and il is a kind of special creditor’s right insteadof real right.According to the trust principle, if the proprietor reconstructs or sells the shopfor better operation it does not violate the investor.s beneficial right. However, theproprietor leases, sells or uses the shop for purpose and his purpose is not for betteroperation, the investor with the status of principal or beneficiary can exercisecancellation right or require the consignee to compensate for damages. However,when the contract is expired and the investor wants to recover the shop, the proprietorcan not return the original items in the shop which may violate the investor’s right. Ifthe proprietor can not return the shop after the expiration of contract due to the sellingor reconstructing behavior, money should be returned to the investor as the"substitution" of trust property according to the identity of trust property. Hence, ifthe trust principle is used to solve such problems, the investor rights can be protected.