Study On The Validity Of Unauthorized Disposition Contract

The issue of unauthorized disposition is not only complex,but also involves a wide range of issues.It has been debated for a long time in the practical and theoretical circles of civil law.Jurist Wang Liming called the issue of unauthorized disposition "the spirit of law",which is evident in its complexity.The validity of unauthorized disposition is mentioned in Article 3 of Judicial Interpretation of Sale Contract and Article 51 of Contract Law.To clarify the effectiveness of the seemingly conflicting unauthorized disposition in these two laws,we should start with the difference between the act of burden and the act of disposition.In all transactions aiming at the change of property rights,there are acts of burden and punishment,that is to say,acts of burden and punishment are objective reality.In terms of legal effect,the two rights are quite different,so the two rights are naturally different in terms of legal basis,which is the fundamental difference between the act of burden and the act of disposition.Whether the act of burden takes effect or not will not decide whether the subsequent action of punishment takes effect or not.Article 15 of the Property Law also declares that the law of our country makes a substantive distinction between the act of burden and the act of disposition.To explore the validity of the contract of unauthorized disposition,we must explore the purpose of the legislator's design of the system.The legislative purpose of the system of unauthorized disposition is to protect not only the real obligee,but also the bona fide relative.This involves the relationship between the contract of unauthorized disposition and the system of bona fide acquisition,as well as the contractual liability of several parties.