Judicial Rules In The Judicial Practice Of Buying Houses By Borrowing Names

In order to control the price rise of the real estate market,China has introduced a series of macro-control policies and price measures.However,in order to avoid policies and measures,some consumers will use the name of others to buy houses and register the houses in their names,which results in the behavior of borrowing names to buy houses.However,the behavior of buying a house by borrowing its name deviates from the relevant rules of the property law of the people's Republic of China on the change of real estate property right,which will result in the inconsistency between the actual owner of the house and the owner of the house in law.However,there are no specific provisions to control this phenomenon in China's law,and the judgments of method officials vary from place to place.Because there are no specific provisions in the law,resulting in different judgments in the cases,it is necessary to solve this problem by comprehensive analysis of the cases about buying houses by borrowing names.This paper classifies 100 cases related to house purchase by borrowing names as different types of cases,analyzes the cause of action,judgment position and judgment ideas of the cases,further analyzes the court's judgment,finds out the problems in the judgment,and gives reasonable suggestions,hoping to give some help to the current judicial judgment in China.First of all,this paper analyzes the causes of the disputes,analyzes the legal relationship,and from the perspective of judicial practice.Then,from the perspective of empirical research,it summarizes the types of cases,judgment positions and judgment ideas,and leads to the current court's position on whether the contract of house borrowing by name is established,which is divided into two positions: invalid and effective.In the end,it expounds the problems existing in the current judicial practice,including the lack of the definition of the contract of borrowing a name to buy a house,thesubstitution of policy for law,the different judgments of the same case,the uncertainty of the evidence rules,the insufficient attention to the interests measurement between the parties,and the reasonable suggestions for the court's judgment: to standardize the application of policies and laws,to build the confirmation rules of house ownership,and to reasonably use the evidence Rules and weighing the interests of all parties,judicial judgment should have a guiding role in society.