論占有連鎖──建議民法債編增訂有償利用基地建屋之規定

A Chain of Possession

本文首先整理分析占有連鎖之法理與適用要件，其次說明我國立法者就占有連鎖之中間人是否具有將其直接占有移轉與占有人之權限一事，分別於民法物權編與民法債編各論設有不同之價值決定。在前者場合，率賦予典權人、地上權人、以及農育權人具有將其直接占有移轉與占有人之權能。與此相對的，於後者情形，是否給予斯項權限殆委諸於私法自治。惟於當事人對此並無特別表示時，立法者基本上傾向於保護出租人、貸與人等這些交付標的物予相對人使用之當事人的信任關係而採取否定態度，俾合理控制因第三人使用該物致增加毀損滅失或貶值之風險。最後，本文建議我國民法債編第426-1條增訂第2項關於「有償利用基地建築房屋，房屋移轉於受讓人時，其有償利用基地契約，對於房屋受讓人，亦繼續存在。」之規定，以解決實務上透過占有連鎖法理所欲解決之拆屋還地問題。

The purpose of this article, which is divided into three parts, is to analyze the existing fundament and conditions of application for a Chain of Possessions/a Multi-Class Possession in Taiwan. Following an introduction relative to problematic in theory and practice, Part II explores and interprets the jurisprudence of Taiwan Supreme Court. This study reveals that the real rights law entitles in principle a dian-holder, a superficiary, or an agricultural right holder to transfer legally his direct possession to another person. On the contrary, we discover that in the field of obligation law, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, a lessee or a borrower of land is not entitled to transfer legally his possession to another person. This nuance is justified by the different nature and character between Rights In Rem and contract law. Finally, Part III concludes by offering an additional article proposition of Article 426-1 to Taiwan Civil Code.