Research On The Validity Determination Of Borrowing A Name To Purchase A House Contract

Against the backdrop of the implementation of policies such as purchase and loan restrictions and affordable housing in the real estate sector by the government,a large number of entities with the ability to purchase houses but without the qualifications to purchase houses use the form of borrowing names to purchase houses.Usually,borrowers who do not have the qualifications to purchase a house but have the intention to purchase a house sign a loan name purchase contract with famous individuals who have the qualifications to purchase a house but do not have the intention to purchase a house based on their intimate relationship.When the ideal state of borrowing a name to buy a house contract is broken,the resulting dispute over the validity of borrowing a name to buy a house contract has also become a major challenge in judicial practice.This article takes a certain number of judicial judgment cases as the starting point,with the determination of the effectiveness of borrowing name buying contracts as the main line,and the main research object is the effectiveness of borrowing name buying contracts and the problems that exist in the handling of related effectiveness determination disputes by people’s courts.Based on the viewpoints and ideas of judicial case judgments,this article proposes questions and analyzes and studies academic and theoretical issues related to the determination of the effectiveness of borrowing name buying contracts,On this basis,relevant suggestions are put forward for properly resolving disputes over the validity determination of borrowing name buying contracts.This article is divided into six parts.The first part is an introduction,mainly focusing on the research background,current research status,and other macro analysis of the effectiveness of borrowing name buying contracts.The second part selects 70 cases involving the determination of contract validity for borrowing names to purchase ordinary limited purchase houses and economically applicable houses for judicial empirical research,focusing on analyzing the judgment viewpoints and ideas of the people’s courts in handling these two types of cases.The third part focuses on the results of judicial empirical research and identifies the main issues that people’s courts currently face in handling relevant cases,such as varying factors in determining the validity of contracts,deviations in the judicial application of national policies,and differences in judicial judgments in the public interest.The fourth part focuses on academic theoretical analysis,focusing on the legal factors involved in the loan name purchase contract.It analyzes and studies the current academic views on the nature of the loan name purchase contract,the ownership nature of the borrower based on the loan name purchase contract,and the social public interests involved in the loan name purchase contract.Based on this,the author proposes his own views.The fifth part studies the relevant legal systems for determining the effectiveness of borrowing name buying contracts abroad.Disputes arising from borrowing name buying contracts abroad are not common,and related research mainly focuses on the mode of property rights change and the system of invalid legal act conversion.The sixth part proposes improvement suggestions for the main issues in the field of disputes over the validity determination of borrowing name buying contracts in China,including standardizing the review points of validity determination,correctly handling legal and policy relationships,and prudently applying the principles of public order and good customs.