浮动抵押逸出担保物权体系的理论证成

具有担保功能的权利,并非都是担保物权。如果一项权利既不符合担保物权的特征,亦有违物权法的基本原则,就不属于担保物权。对比浮动抵押与担保物权的特征可以发现,浮动抵押有担保功能但并非担保物权。在民法典编纂背景下,宜将浮动抵押从担保物权体系剔除。考察比较法资料,结合“charge”的词源语义,遵循语言翻译的忠实严谨原则,宜将“floating charge”译为“浮动担保”而非“浮动抵押”。至于浮动担保何去何从,相对合理的方案是将其嵌入合同法域,规定于我国民法典合同编之“合同的担保”章节,以此彰显民法典的体系性与逻辑性。

The Theoretical Proof of Excluding the Floating Charge from the System of the Security Interest

Not all rights with the function of security belong to the security interest.A right does not belong to the security interest in the event that it does not conform to the characteristics of the security interest and violates the basic principles of the Property Law.Comparing the characteristics of the floating charge with the security interest,it is obvious that although the former has the security function,it does not belong to the security interest.In the context of the codification of the Civil Code,it is advisable to exclude the floating charge from the system of the security interest.Under the condition of researching information of the comparative law,combining with the etymology and semantics of“charge”,and abiding by the principle of faithfulness and rigor in language translation,it is favorable to translate“floating charge”as“浮动担保”rather than“浮动抵押”.As for the floating charge,the relatively reasonable program is to absorb it in the field of the Contract Law,and to provide it in the chapter of“Guarantee of Contract”under the contract part of the Civil Code,so as to demonstrate the Civil Code being systematical and logical.