Evaluation And Analysis Of "Housing Registration Administrative Affirmation Cases"

Among the Housing Registration Administrative Affirmation Cases selected intothis article, whether the registration authority has performed the review responsibilityand whether the bona fide acquisition system is applicable to this case are the focusesof controversy between the plaintiff and the defendant and also the key to theanalytical study in this thesis. On one hand, due to the absence of clear specificationin the Property Law of the People’s Republic of China on adoption of formalexamination or substantive examination by registration authority, registrationauthorities basically selects the standards of formal examination, to reduce their ownworkload and legal responsibilities. While in reality, the Legal Property RegistrationSystem needs to strengthen substantive review, to reflect the connection between theregistration system and legal system on property rights. Therefore, determining thesubstantive review standard is an important means to improve the registration system.On the other hand, China’s bona fide acquisition system is built on the basis ofproperty right alteration mode dominated by claim formalism and supplemented byconcensualism, with unauthorized disposition as a precondition, so the judgment onthe nature of the transfer contract directly determines whether the bona fideacquisition system is applicable. However, in theory and practice, there are a lot ofcontroversies on the judgment of unauthorized disposition. Firstly, it is therecognition of the nature of unauthorized disposition. Secondly, it is the connectionbetween unauthorized disposition in bona fide acquisition and the unauthorizeddisposition in contract law. Finally, it is the impact of the force of the unauthorizeddisposition transfer contract on the application of bona fide acquisition. Inrecognizing the nature of unauthorized disposition, the unauthorized dispositionaction and the unauthorized agency action should be strictly distinguished, since theunauthorized agency action also includes disposition action which however does notbelong to the unauthorized disposition in the bona fide acquisition system. Therefore,there is no possibility of applying bona fide acquisition. Judgment on the goodwill ofa third person is also a complex issue, involving the judgment standards of goodwill,the judgment time point and other issues. In this case, the judge at the first instancefinds out that the defendant has performed reasonable review duties; its registrationaction is legal and valid; and the third person applies to bona fide acquisition, maintaining the house ownership transferred thereto. However, the judge has garbledunauthorized agency action and has interpreted it as “unauthorized” and “disposition”,thus believes that it applies to the bona fide acquisition system. It is a seriousjudgment error.