Research On Legal Issues Of Disputes Over Borrowing Name To Purchase House

Real estate plays an important role in China's social and economic life.The problem of borrowing name to purchase house has become a hot issue in recent years.Since Beijing began to restrict purchase policy,nearly 40 first-line and second-line cities have also begun to implement different forms of restriction purchase policy.Of course,the reasons for borrowing name to purchase house are not only because of the restriction policies issued by various regions,such as the loan restriction policies of banks,or because the newly-needed house buyers do not have certain qualifications for buying houses and enjoy the purchase preferences.The disputes of borrowing name to purchase house caused by various reasons lead to some obstacles in the application of law in borrowing name to purchase house disputes.Although the existing laws and regulations in our country do not explicitly prohibit the purchase of houses by borrowing names,in the judicial practice,the Supreme Court has tendentious opinions.The courts at all levels can adjudicate on the basis of the opinions.The results of each case are much the same,and there are many differences in theory.Therefore,the legal disputes caused by the borrowing name to purchase house show an increasing trend.The first part of this dissertation summarizes the basic problems of borrowing name to purchase house,expounds the current situation and risks of borrowing name to purchase house in China,and summarizes the problems existing in the judicial trial practice of borrowing name to purchase house disputes.Firstly,the nature of borrowing name to purchase house agreement is controversial.Some people believe that borrowing name to purchase house agreement is valid,while others believe that borrowed house purchase agreement is invalid.Secondly,there are differences in the ownership of houses purchased under the pretext.Some courts have decided that the houses involved belong to the actual investors,and others have decided that the houses involved belong to the registered nominal.The second part of this dissertation combs the legal relationship between the parties.There are mainly two pairs of legal relations in the borrowing name to purchase house,the legal relationship between the actual investor and the registered nominal person,and the legal relationship between the registered nominal person and the housing seller.Among them,the more complex one is the legal relationship between the actual investor and the registered nominal person.It is trust relationship,the second view is agency relationship,and the third view is trust relationship.This dissertation agrees with the last view.The third part of this dissertation is about the effectiveness of the contract involved in the borrowing purchase.The first is the effectiveness of the borrowing name agreement.This dissertation holds that the borrowing name agreement should be considered invalid because of the violation of public order and good customs or the violation of social and public interests in the borrowing name purchase of affordable houses and houses purchased under borrowing to circumvent the restriction policy.If no other contract is invalid,the borrowing name agreement shall be deemed to be valid The second is the validity of the house sale contract formed by the borrowed name.This dissertation holds that the borrowing name to purchase house behavior does not belong to conspiracy and hypocrisy,nor does it belong to individual hypocrisy.It is registered nominal person who meets the purchase conditions.Therefore,the registered nominal person and the house seller will not be affected by the borrowed name agreement,and should be recognized as the validity of the house sale contract.The fourth part of this dissertation is about the ownership of the real right of the purchased house registered by name.Academically,there are mainly two conflicting views.The first view is to support the real investor to own the house when certain conditions are met.The second view is to register the house as a registered righteous person according to the records in the real estate register.This dissertation holds that we should deal with the case according to the proof,pay attention to the case where the registered nominal person disposes the house to the third person,and focus on the protection of the trust interests of the bona fides third party,and balance the lawful rights and interests between the actual investor and the third person according to whether the third party is bona fides and whether the house has been transferred to the third person.