On The Transformation And Confrontation Of The Owership Of Special Movable Property

Since the promulgation of Property Law of the People’s Republic of China,there have being a number of disputes on its Article 24 in both the academic circle and judicial application,with each other which are not isolated but interrelated.Article 24 of Property Law,as a whole,contains three subjects within its rules,namely,the original real right person,the new real right person,and the third party in good faith.The three subjects hold a logical sequence(levels)in their relationship—at the first level appears the relationship between the original real right person and the new real right person;the second,the relationship between the original real right person and the third party of good faith;and the third,the relationship between the new real right person and the third party of good faith.The first two levels act as conditions(cause)while the third presents the result(effect).The three levels together in a hierarchy construct the theoretical system of Article 24.The "real right" in Article 24 of Property Law refers to the ownership of special movable property,that is,the transformation of ownership of special movable property from the original real right person to the new real right person.Delivery is one of the requirements of validity during the transformation of the ownership of special movable property,which includes actual delivery as well as conceptual delivery.Both possession and registrationare the methods of publicity of the ownership of special movable property.There exists the connection involving real right between the original real right person and the third person of good faith.The recognition of "good faith" of the third party is closely related to the method of publicity of special movable property ownership.The"confrontation" between the new real right person and the third party of good faith is neither to deny the other party’s rights nor to justify one’s own rights.The confrontation demonstrates that both sides are in the antagonistic state.As for the ultimate ownership of rights,other rules or institutions shall be introduced to judge.Therefore,Article 24 of Property Law shall not be used as the substantive basis for judicial trial.The purpose of registration confrontation is "If not registered,then shall not confront." rather than "Once registered,then confront."The subject of "no confrontation" is the new real right person,that is,the assignee of the ownership of special movable property.Article 24 of Property Law focuses more on the assignee with the intention to remind,warn,and encourage them to register to avoid the risks of no right to confront.In the correlation,if any,with other rules,Article 24 of Property Law shall not be regarded simply as the basis for Provision 10 of Judicial Interpretation of the Sales Contract.Also,Article 24 of Property Law is essentially different from Article 106.1n contrast to Article 24,the three subjects included in Article 206,at each level,all show significant differences.Therefore,the two Articles should be clearly demarcated and perform their respective functions.