Rules For Change Of Ownership Of Motor Vehicles

Article 225 of China’s Civil Code has inherited the provisions of Article 24 of the Property Law,establishing the rule of "effective delivery®istration confrontation" for changes in motor vehicle ownership.However,registration antagonism originated from creditor’s rights doctrine countries,aiming to solve the transaction security issues caused by the consensual entry into force.In China,the current ownership of movable property takes effect based on delivery,which is inconsistent with the original environment of registration antagonism.This legislative mix has led to many problems in the rules of motor vehicle ownership change.At the same time,the Civil Code has begun to favor functional guarantees,and registration confrontation is generally applicable to the issue of chattel security.Ownership retention transactions also involve registration confrontation systems,which brings more confusion to the inherently complex issue of motor vehicle ownership.This article starts with a case study and analyzes relevant judgments in recent years,focusing on the problems existing in the current "effective delivery®istration confrontation" rule in practical trials,including theoretical judicial interpretations that conflict with the concept of legal provisions,the emergence of property rights that cannot be opposed to third parties,and judicial interpretations that violate the principle of equality of claims;uneven distribution of risks in practice,"registered-but-not-delivered" situations,the scope of bona fide third parties,and the applicable options for bona fide acquisition versus registration under unauthorized disposition.Based on the analysis of the problem,the current solutions and existing doubts of the main viewpoints of the three schools in the academic community are straightened out:"Delivery effectiveness®istration confrontation" is the most supported viewpoint in the current academic community,but under the principle of delivery effectiveness,it is difficult to reach a consistent conclusion on the understanding of registration confrontation;"agreed entry into force+registration confrontation" attempts to reconstruct the rules of motor vehicle ownership change through a new path of creditor’s rights doctrine,but it is not suitable for China’s current property rights system;"mixed elements" support that both delivery and registration can cause changes in ownership.This theory does not have obvious rationality in explaining registration confrontation due to transaction costs.Considering the necessity of further academic discussion,based on the analysis of the existing rule system and various academic theories,the basic viewpoint of this article:if the change of motor vehicle ownership wants to be fully integrated into the system of the property rights section of the Civil Code,the principle of effective delivery of movable property can be maintained,and the bona fide acquisition system can be used to substantially cover the registration confrontation rule to achieve the purpose of protecting third parties and maintaining transaction safety.This can solve the problem of the choice between the two systems in the case of disposition of real rights,as well as the conflict of effectiveness between delivery and registration brought about by registration antagonism.At the same time,in the bona fide acquisition of motor vehicles,the subjective "bona fide" criterion should be the combination of possession and registration,and the acquisition should be based on delivery,excluding the delivery method of possession change,to further consolidate transaction security.