摘要
《民法典》仅对直接融资租赁交易模式加以明确,并未对售后回租等其他融资租赁交易模式进行有效统摄,同时也未能清晰厘定融资租赁物范畴,缺乏适格融资租赁物的择取标准。其将融资租赁纳入动产担保交易的创新举动虽积极回应了行业实践的现实需求,但融资租赁公示登记和担保权实现的具体规则尚待释明。基于此,通过对《民法典》融资租赁合同相关规定的择要评析,对存有商榷空间的部分内容展开详细讨论,然后从融资租赁资金融通的工具目的与租赁形式本质的双重视角对融资租赁交易性质进行再剖析,肯认融资租赁与传统租赁的制度关联,进而以此为前提,探讨后《民法典》时代完善融资租赁法律治理的可能路径与具体展开方式。
Only the direct financial lease trade mode is defined while the other financial lease trade modes like sale and leaseback are not effectively summarized in Civil Code.Simultaneously,the scope of financial lease objects is not explicitly defined,and there is no selection criterion of qualified financial lease objects.Though the innovative measure that integrates financial lease into chattel secured trade is a positive response to the practical needs of industry practice,the specific rules of public registration of financial lease and realization of security rights remain to be clarified.On this basis,through essential analysis on relevant provisions in financial lease contract in Civil Code,some content to be deliberated will be discussed in detail in this paper.Then,from the dual perspectives of tool purpose and lease form nature of financial lease,the nature of financial lease trade will be further analyzed and the institutional correlation between financial lease and traditional lease will be affirmed,based on which the possible routes and specific implementing modes to perfect the legal governance financial lease in the post-Civil Code era will be discussed.
作者
梅夏英
王剑
MEI Xia-ying;WANG Jian(School of Law,University of International Business and Economics,Beijing 100029,China)
出处
《烟台大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》
CSSCI
2021年第5期32-41,共10页
Journal of Yantai University(Philosophy and Social Science Edition)
关键词
《民法典》
动产担保
融资租赁
融资租赁物
Civil Code
chattel security
financial lease
financial lease objects
