Exploring The Ownership Of The House By Name

Recently,ownership disputes arising from the name-borrowing house purchase issue have shown explosive growth.Regarding the ownership ascription in the matter of name-borrowing house purchase,local courts have different views and the judicial practice varies greatly.Therefore,it's a matter of great urgency to raise a unified,legally and reasonable settlement rule for the name-borrowing house purchase issue.In China,the main transaction mode of the real estate rights based on legal actions is creditor formalism,that is to say,the analysis of the ownership of name-borrowing house purchase issue needs to combine the juristic act of obligation and the juristic act of real right,explore the process of ownership change and determine the final ownership ascription.The first part discusses the issue of the contract in the name-borrowing house purchase issue.There are two contracts in name-borrowing house purchase issue.One is the name-borrowed contract signed by the name-borrower and the name-lender,another is the house purchase contract signed by the name-lender and the house seller.The name-lender is obliged to buy the house and handle the real estate registration in the name of himself or herself according to the name-borrowed contract.Therefore,the name-lender concludes the house purchase contract with the house seller and handles the real estate registration.In the end,the name-lender obtains the house ownership according to law.The second part discusses real estate registration in the name-borrowing house purchase issue.The theory of fact property right denies the effectiveness of the registration of real estate on the ground that the name-borrower enjoys factual rights.However,on the one hand,the theory of fact property right has an imbalance in the value measurement on the name-borrowing house purchase issue which gives excessive protection to name-borrower.On the other hand,the fact property right lacks the basic attributes that property rights should have.Therefore,it should not become the theoretical basis for the legality of name-borrower,and it is not enough to overturn the presumption of validity of real estate registration.For the protection of the principle of publicity of property rights and the protection of the trust interests of third parties in transactions,the appearance of publicity in the registration of real estate shall be maintained,and the ownership of the property shall be deemed to be owned by the name-lender.The third part discusses the rules of judging the ownership of property rights in the name-borrowing house purchase issue.The agreement on the ownership of the house in the name-borrowed contract only has the validity of the creditor's rights,and the legal effect of the change of property rights cannot be directly occurred.Therefore,in the internal relationship between the name-lender and the name-borrower,the nameborrower may claim that the name-lender fulfills the name-borrowed contract or assume the obligation to perform the obligation.In the external relationship related to the third person,the conflicts of rights between the name-borrower and other creditors of the name-lender should be handled in accordance with the general conflict of rights rules.If the name-borrower suffers damage due to the name-lender's non-performance of debt,the name-borrower can ask the name-lender to bear the liability for breach of contract or bear the tort liability according to the name-borrowed contract and the rules of Contract Law of the People's Republic of China.The scope of damages shall be limited to the market price of the house when the name-borrower knows or should know that the name-lender constitutes a substantial breach of contract.