| At present, in the judicial practice, there are more and more disputes concerning urban residents to purchase rural housing. Therefore, it is necessary for us to discuss the changing of property rights because of the transfer of the rural housing. Firstly, whether the article 62 and article 63 of the Land Administration Law is effectively mandatory provisions or not, can they be applied to decide the invalidity of the contract, it is the first controversial point in this case. About article 62 and article 63, we can come to the conclusion that they are not effectively mandatory provisions, and they can not be applied in this case,the transferring rural housing contract should be ascertained as valid.Secondly, the court judges that Mr Pang is unable to obtain the right to the use of house sites. but the court judges that the contract of transferring rural housing between Mr Pang and Mr Zhong is effective. And the court of appeals maintains the original judgment on the issue. This causes a fact that Mr Zhong can not obtain the right to the use of house sites, but he can get the ownership of rural house.This contradicts the principle of the simultaneous changing of property rights of building and land. It can draw a conclusion that the transferring rural housing does not necessarily obey the principle of the simultaneous changing of property rights of building and land from discussion. And we can solve the problem of land right source from bringing the legal right of renting land for building. Finally, Mr Zhong claims he can acquire the rural house by Bona Fide Acquisition. So, this article analyzes the constitutive requirements of Bona Fide Acquisition of real estate, and draws a conclusion that rural housing can apply the article 106 of the Property Law. Then, the author investigates how to cognize Bona Fide. Because this case didn't exist unauthorized disposition, so Mr Zhong can not acquire the rural house by Bona Fide Acquisition. |
PDF Full Text Request