购置款抵押权的竞存对抗规则研究

满足《民法典》第416条要件的购置款抵押权可以对抗公示在先的固定担保权,此种处理模式虽使外部债权人负担一定审查成本,但总体上符合利益衡量视角下的比例原则。《民法典》在浮动抵押领域中采取“登记主义”的立场,与“超级优先权规则”形成了体系性的规范协调。购置款抵押权与留置权竞存时,后者始终处于优先受偿顺位。在功能主义视角下,所有权保留和融资租赁可准用超级优先权规则,但应作必要限制。购置款抵押权人不得对抗正常经营活动中已经支付合理价款并取得抵押财产的买受人。《民法典》未明文确立担保权收益延伸规则,但在理论层面上仍尚有将其纳入现行法体系的解释空间,且民事主体可在商业实践中通过意思自治达致类似效果。

Research on the Rules of Confrontation of Acquisition Mortgage Right

The acquisition mortgage right that satisfies the requirements of Article 416 of the Civil Code may be enforced against a prior fixed security right.Although this treatment makes external creditors bear certain review costs,it is generally in line with the proportionality principle from the perspective of interest balance.The Civil Code adopts a“registration”position in the area of floating mortgage,which constitutes a systemic normative harmony with the“super-priority rule”.When the coexistence of acquisition mortgage right and lien occurs,the latter is always in priority.From the perspective of functionalism,the super-priority rule can be applied to ownership retention and financial leasing,but necessary restrictions should be made on its application.Acquisition mortgagee is not entitled against a buyer who has paid reasonable price and obtained mortgaged property in ordinary course of business.The Civil Code does not explicitly establish the extension rule of the proceeds of security right,but there is still room to explain it in the current legal system theoretically,and civil subjects can achieve similar effects through autonomy of will in commercial practice.