Comment On The Appeal Case Of North Run Heavy Truck And Changchun Credit Guarantee Company

In the contract of ownership reservation,on the one hand,the buyer can use and possession of subject matter before the payment of the contract price;on the other hand,the seller retains the ownership of the subject matter before the buyer pay off the whole contract price.Internally,this distinction of rights deepens the interests of both parties to the sale and purchase contract;but outside,because the ownership retention system lacks publicity,the separation of ownership and possession of the subject matter often leads the third person to not know the truth of the subject matter ownership of the state,which led to disputes.The appeal case of North Run Heavy Truck and Changchun Credit Guarantee Company is a typical case of disputes arising from the separation of ownership of the subject matter in the contract of ownership reservation,the case mainly has two controversial focuses:first,whether the North Run Heavy Truck has abandoned the ownership of the competing vehicles;and,second,whether the Changchun Credit Guarantee Company has obtained the floating mortgage of the complaint vehicle in good faith.On the focus of controversy one,in the retention of title,based on the agreement of remaining the ownership of the subject matter between the seller and the buyer,as well as the right to retrieve datio in solutum,the seller's right to claim the buyer's contract price and the seller's right to retrieve the subject matter should be coexistent rather than the opposite relationship.Therefore,the North Run Heavy Truck simply to the court to claim that the contract price of North China's Auto Trade claims can not constitute its claim against the vehicle claims the property rights of the obstruction,and also can not be regarded as North Run Heavy Truck to give up the ownership of the vehicle.On the focus of controversy two,although it is seldom mentioned that whether the movable property floating mortgage can be applied in good faith acquisition in our theory,however,due to China's"Property Law" Article 106,paragraph 3 provides:"the parties in good faith to obtain other property rights,with reference to the provisions of the previous two",and the movable property floating mortgage is the real right expressly stipulated in the property law of our country,therefore,there is a legal basis for the acquisition of the movable property floating mortgage in good faith in our country,and the movable property floating mortgage can be obtained in good faith in our country.Even so,in this case,because the behavior of Changchun Credit Guarantee Company does not comply with the elements of bona fide acquisition of the movable property floating,so it does not have obtained the mortgage of the vehicle in good faith.