On The Validity Of Guaranteed Sales Contract

The private lending market is increasingly active,and the guarantee method of creditor's rights is constantly innovating,and collateralized trading is one of them.When the borrower and the lender sign the contract for the loan contract,they also sign a sales contract to guarantee the performance of the loan.Such contracts are different from common guarantee contracts,and their nature and effectiveness are recognized.The civil law theory circles have great differences.The practice of judicial trials is different,and there are cases of"different judgments in the same case."To this end,the Supreme People's Court's judicial interpretation of the trial of private lending cases stipulates such contracts,but only explicitly deal with the lending disputes,and evade the effectiveness of the purchases and guarantees for guarantees,and does not completely solve the problem.The proper handling of such disputes not only plays an important role in safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of both creditors and debtors,but also helps to maintain the justice and authority of the judiciary and guarantee the stability of the transaction.The reason why the collateralized sales contract is widely used in the practice of lending is mainly that the private lending is becoming more active,the borrower has no other suitable collateral,and its establishment and implementation are convenient.Compared with the common guarantees,the guarantee-type sale and purchase has the characteristics that the loan contract and the house sale contract exist at the same time,the house for sale and purchase is pre-sale registration or the notice registration procedure,and the name is the purchase and sale.For the collateralized sales contract dispute,the judicial interpretation provides for the trial of the private lending legal relationship,and there is no provision for the part of the sales contract,thus leaving a potential dispute.As for the nature of the collateralized sales contract,there are theoretically atypical guarantees(including the transfer guarantee and the subsequent guarantee),the mortgage claim,the substitute settlement,etc.,the interpretation path is different,and the sale contract is denied.The effectiveness of this paper is an analysis of the existing doctrines:(after)the concession has certain controversy under the limitation of the statutory principle of property rights.The fundamental reason is that(after)concession is not a statutory security interest in judicial practice.This cannot be used as a basis for trial;the explanation of the mortgage guarantee is that the registration of real estate change is the premise of creating property rights.In the guarantee-type sales contract,the parties did not perform the house change registration because they did not satisfy the mortgage conditions or were unwilling to mortgage registration.The purpose of the party's^guarantee cannot be fulfilled;the means of settlement of the object is the settlement of the object,and the contract must be delivered.The guarantee-type sale contract only has the meaning of the party's meaning,and the constituent elements of the settlement cannot be satisfied based on the agreement.The sale and purchase in a secured transaction,although the meaning of the parties is considered to be a guarantee,does not have the effect of a security interest.The loan contract and the sales contract signed by the parties to the loan constitute a mixed contract,and the two parties can offset the creditor's rights arising from the loan contract by performing the sale and purchase contract,and finally eliminate the creditor's debt of the loan contract as the main contract relationship.