A Study On The Legal Problems Of Borrowing The Name Of Others To Buy A House

Today,as the market economy develops rapidly,housing not only is the most basic means of maintenance,but also is a private property held by people as an important means of realizing assets protection.In recent years,influenced by the excessive investment in the real estate market and speculative buyers,the house prices rose too fast.In order to control housing prices and to ensure that people's livelihood,the State Council and local governments promulgated a series of restrictions on the purchase of the main qualifications and restrictions on the number of buyers and loan conditions notice and rules.At the same time,in order to solve the problem of housing difficulties of low-income families,the Government has also issued a policy to construct affordable housing and price of commercial housing with the nature of social security.some enterprises build unit fund-raising room for employees as a internal welfare,and only qualified internal staff is eligible to buy.Therefore,restricted by certain conditions certain conditions,people who do not have the qualification to purchase housing property borrow names to buy houses,and the phenomenon of borrowing names to buy houses emerges.Generally,the actual purchaser of the house uses the name of another person to buy the house,and the property of the house is registered in the name of others,resulting in the actual rights of the owner and the registration of the right person inconsistent situation and then lead to various types of disputes.This will be discussed in this article of borrowing names to buy houses.People who use the name of others to buy a house are called the actual buyer,and people who lend their own name to others are called the register.Normally,the register and the actual holder of the house are the same person,but in exceptional circumstances,due to the negligence of the staff member of the immovable property registration agency or the performance of an invalid contract,etc.,the ownership of the house is registered under the name of a non-actual right holder.The situation of the actual right of the owner and the registered right owner caused by the borrowing behavior discussed in this article is due to the agreement between the two parties.In the judicial practice,the actual buyer borrow a name to buy a house out of a variety of reasons,some out of buying affordable housing and price of commercial housing with the nature of social security,some out of obtaining loans from banks,and some are to avoid the "restriction order" and other policies Influence,and all this aggravate the complexity of the dispute.At the same time,our law did not make clear and specific provisions on borrowing names to buy houses.What's more,the court has a different understanding on the issue out of different value judgment.Different courts have disputes in the trial standard and the standard is not identical so that the results of the trial are different,and even "the same case of different judgments" come into being,and this seriously undermining the judicial authority.To solve this problem,this article takes cases as the breakthrough point,analyzes and summarizes the related legal issues involved in the practice of borrowing names to buy houses in the judicial practice,defines the concept and the nature of borrowing names to buy houses with the existing legislation and the legal theory,discuss the effectiveness of the agreement,in order to explore the best way of solving the problem of borrowing names to buy houses with a view to the existing legislative framework.The preface mainly introduces the background of the selected topic,the viewpoints of scholars and the research ideas.This article is divided into four parts:The first part:case analysis.According to the nature of the building and the reasons of borrowing names,this part choose five representative cases.The first case is borrowing names to buy unit fund-raising room.The Second and third are two cases that people borrow names violating the purchase order,but the court has made a different decision.the fourth and fifth cases that people borrowing names to buy affordable housing and limit of commercial housing.The facts of five cases are different but related.this article has a separate and comparative analysis of the five cases,and reviews the reasons of borrowing names,the nature of the house,the court's judicial position and the controversial focus of the discussion of two parties to show the justice of buying house in order to lay the foundation for the development of blow.The second part:the concept and nature of borrowing names to buy houses.First of all,the concept of borrowing names to buy houses and the agreement is defined,and then contrast the agreement of borrowing names to buy houses with other similar concepts.Through the analysis,the agreement of borrowing names to buy houses is a nameless contract,and the contract is the most similar to Commission contract,and according to Item 142 of the Contract Law,we can refer to the provisions of the commission contract.The third part,the effectiveness of the agreement of borrowing name to buy houses.The validity of the contract should be deemed valid if the meaning of the parties is free,complete and accurate,unless the contract is invalid.According to the contract law and the relevant judicial interpretation of the rules,If Invalid reason can not found in the contract,the contract should be shall be deemed valid.The logic of this section is based on article 142 of the Contract Law,and will analyze the effectiveness of the agreement of borrowing name to buy houses with different reasons.The fourth part,determination of the ownership of the property between the actual buyer and the register.In the article,the controversy over the housing ownership is limited between the actual buyer and the register.Based on the above legal issues involved in borrowing name to buy houses,we will analyses the housing ownership combining the legal theory of alteration of real right,the distinguishing principle theory and the theory of real estate registration.This Article holds that,if the agreement is invalid,the actual buyer can not obtain the ownership of the house;if the agreement is valid,In principle the actual buyer can not obtain the ownership of the house in the full proof.