Analysis Of The Validity Of Contract About Borrowing Name To Purchase House Property

As one kind of important real estate,premise is related with our daily life a lot.Under the rapid increasing price,many persons try to give up purchasing.Against this background,the State Council introduces “house purchase restriction” policies to control the excessive speculation of real estate market.Seven ministries and commissions jointly proclaim “Measures on Administration of Affordable Homes” to help low-income people who can't afford a premise.On one hand,the policies above suppress the increasing price.O n the other hand,some purchasers try to adopt “detour” measures to reach the goal of buying premises.Borrowing name to buy premises is one kind of situation that the borrowing person uses the name of lending person to purchase a premise.Seen from the outside,lending person makes a deal with seller and acquires the ownership of house,but borrowing person controls the house through the borrow name contract.We need to pay attention to the challenges that borrowing name to buy premises has made on real estate register,and we should have an aware of the high risk.Borrowing person must bear more burdens of proof in practice,otherwise he will lose the case.A lot of sentence in juridical practice have many different kind of affirmation on the case,even some is completely contradictory.At the same time,the theories field doesn't reach an agreement on the conduct,such as the ownership of house,the validity of contract.Although borrowing name to buy premises is a perennial behavior of livelihood,it hasn't formed the agreed understanding as a legal act.The contract of borrowing name to buy premises has complicated legal relationships,including borrowing person,lending person and seller.The legal nature and concept of the act still exist some disputes.C hoosing the theory of unnamed contract is correct to certain extent,but we also should keep our eyes on the relevance of the contracts' content.The borrowing name contract can be roughly divided two types,which covers the contract between seller with borrowing person or lending person.Through the specific provisions of contract law and viewpoints of contract theory,enumerating the possible circumstance that contract can be abandoned or recognised invalid,I would like to think that the probability of the situation is small.We should take the balance of individual interests and socially public interests as fundamental basis,respect the autonomy of the parties on the condition of not damaging socially public interests and realize the contract law's basic principle of advocating transaction.When the contract is abandoned,the parties should bear fault responsibility.When the contract is defined invalid,we can take measures to partially affirm the validity of contract's other content.Generally speaking,when the contract is valid,the parties of contract and borrowing person' right which is based on borrowing name contract will have significant influence on the ownership of premise.And at the time,the parties thereto performance the obligation of returning premise and changing registration according to the contract's promises.Based on the Analysis of extant contradictory sentence,we should consistently improve the way to affirmative validity of borrowing name contract in trial process.