Research On Legal Issues About Borrowing Name To Purchase Premises

In the daily life of the citizens, premises is the most basic means of livelihood, is related to economic development and social stability. Gradually improvement on realty legal system of our country is a reflection of the economic and social development, also played positive role in the economic society. In recent years, most prominent problem in real estate market is the rising prices, purchase estate is investment tool more than basic necessities. Due to various reasons, the investor often find others to purchase, then change register after get the premises. This paper discusses the validity of the contract, the ownership and the subsequent problems, find a solution to make the conform to the laws and balanced the interests of all parties.As a Nameless contract, “borrowing name” happened with the special social background, the solution of the dispute need to be placed within the existing legal system. From the perspective of the mind, consideration in this contract is the "Name", parties have reservation their mind for other people. From malicious collusion’s point of view, the position of parties is consistent, through agreement to get the premises is more important than the contract of exchange between parties. From the perspective of agency, agent system in what degree impact borrowing name is worth considering.Borrow name contract is on the edge of the contract law, the valid or invalid all sides have considerable controversy. In the practice of different subject may make the opposite judgment, except for different cases of specific facts, borrowing name contract itself has considerable space system. Contract contain complete and accurate mind of parties shall be deemed to be valid, unless it have the contract shall be invalid, in it harm the public interests or others, fraud third person or illegality. All of this can’t directly to borrow contract as invalid, restrictions on the purchase premises affect contract validity should be rational. This paper argues that if there is no absolute illegal violation or damage social and public interests, borrowing name contract should be valid.Except for validity of borrowing name contract, the interests of the parties is more directly related to ownership of properties, it depend on rules in “property law” and ”contract law”etc, such as Bona Fide Acquisition system.The degree of specialization of parties or circulation of premises will affect effect of parties’ s dealing with the premises. People who borrowing name always in weak position, its have some original reason.Whatever contract is void or valid, who own the premises,some follow-up question must taken into account. Whether the people who can’t get premises can request compensation or punish both sides for public policy, etc. Premises is most important asset in life, only a proper solution can resolve disputes and safeguard the justice of law.