Research On The Judicial Judgment Position Of House Purchase Cases In My Country

In order to regulate the real estate market,the government has introduced a series of policies.Although it has a certain effect,it also caused the phenomenon that borrowing name to purchase house,and the phenomenon increasing day by day.Because the cases take place between the special people,and legal relation is relatively complex,if cannot be deal properly,it will bring many negative influence.The article adopts the literature analysis method to analyze the research status of borrowing name to purchase house.The method of analyzing cases,and empirical analysis method is adopted to analyze the judge's different position from judicial practice.Find out the bifurcation problems between different judicial positions in the case,analyze the problems and put forward the refereeing suggestions.The main body of the article consists of four chapters,the main content as follows: The first chapter is borrowing name to purchase house connotation and the origin of it.This chapter gives a brief account,that the meaning of borrowing name to purchase house,and analyzes the house type,the reasons for the phenomenon.The second chapter is the status of the judge in the case of borrowing name to purchase house.Author takes the real case as the sample and sums up the four basic positions of the cases:Confirm the real ownership of the house is belonged to the part that borrowing name;The borrowing name to purchase house agreement is invalid,the right of confirmation shall be rejected;To confirm the validity of the agreement and reject the right of confirmation;Identify only lending relationships between part A(the part that borrowing name)and part B(the opposite part).Analyze each judicial position's path,and summarize the main problems between the different positions.The third chapter is the specific analysis of the problems between the different positions.The majority of judges believe that only by borrowing name to purchase house agreement cannot determine the fact that borrowing name to purchase house,and should assist other evidence;When confirming the validity of the agreement,the emphasis will be on where,whether the agreement is invalid due to the violation of the mandatory provisions of laws andadministrative regulations.And if it damage the public interest of the society;When confirming the ownership of the property,the property of the real right and whether the part B have the right to dispose of the house are analyzed.The fourth chapter is the referee's advice on the cases that borrowing name to Purchase house.Based on author's superficial understanding,author makes suggestions to the judgement of the case.The borrowing name to purchase house agreement is the main evidence and should assist other evidence to be fully recognized;When the target house is a affordable housing,the agreement shall be invalid,because it will damage the public interest of the society;When the house is other types,the agreement will be effective.And also distinguish real right from debt right,cannot rely on the agreement directly to confirm the property of the target house;The recognition of the real right of the part A,and identify whether the subject house is involved in the third party.The behavior should not be encouraged,so the prevailing party should bear the corresponding responsibility.