浙江工商大学学报

《民法典》新增第642—643条关于所有权保留制度引发学界争议,司法实践遭受“同案不同判”之困扰。基于内外在体系的双重分析,所有权构造论更契合我国法律体系。外在体系下,所有权保留制度可以纳入物权行为附停止条件的模式;内在体系下,其既贯彻了意思自治原则,又能保障当事人担保价金债权之功能。在教义学层面能够提供更加一致且合理的法律解释模型,在买受人不能支付价款时出卖人行使取回权的同时通过赋予买受人回赎权、引入期待权兼顾买受人利益。与此同时,双方当事人的处分权、破产或接受强制执行时其利益状态等争议均能得到妥当解决。文章还进一步分析了登记对抗、正常经营买受人、超级优先权等具体规则在内外在协调性方面存在的法律漏洞,并提出相应的法律续造路径。

The newly added Articles 642-643 of theCivil Codeconcerning the retention of title system have sparked academic debate, while judicial practice suffers from inconsistent rulings in similar cases. Through a dual analysis of internal and external systems, the ownership structural theory proves more compatible with China's legal framework. From the external system perspective, the retention of title can be incorporated into the model of conditional real rights acts. From the internal system perspective, it not only implements the principle of autonomy of will but also safeguards the parties' functional interest in securing payment claims. At the doctrinal level, this approach provides a more consistent and reasonable legal interpretation model. When the buyer fails to make payment, while granting the seller the right of repossession, the system balances buyer interests through redemption rights and the introduction of expectancy rights. Furthermore, the disposition rights of both parties and their respective interests in bankruptcy or compulsory enforcement scenarios can be properly addressed. The article also examines legal gaps in specific rules such as registration opposition, buyers in ordinary course of business, and super-priority from the perspective of internal-external system coordination, proposing corresponding paths for legal development.