作為物權憑證的地契及其在現代觀念中的遺存

On Contract for Land as Title Deed and its Remains in Contemporary Concept

從傳統中國不動產交易的歷史來看，地契是不動產物權主要的乃至唯一的憑證，因此存在「重契券輕官簿」的民間習慣。官方建立的魚鱗冊、黃冊，或者官給的產權證明，僅服務於稅收徵管之目的，無法準確反映物權狀況。其中原因並非是官方沒有能力設置類似於不動產登記的制度，而是沒有必要，因為不動產登記保障交易安全、為糾紛解決提供准據的功能自有各種交易習慣承當。此種重契券而輕官簿的觀念，即使在實定法改弦易轍的今天，依舊可以從人們的行為中窺見。此種觀察亦能為實務提供鏡鑒：立法不能對長久的習慣視而不見，司法亦可靈活地為重契券的傳統留有一席之地。

"In retrospect of real property transaction in ancient China, it can be found that“contract for estate”is the counterpart of Title deed in common law, and there exists a customary rule that title deeds prevail official registry. Official records, such as Fish-scale Booklet and Yellow Booklet or certificates issued by government aiming at revenue collection are not qualified to be evidence of property right. The reason is not the government’s lack of ability to establish a system parallel to estate registry, but there’s no need to do so, because a whole range of customs are competent to ensure safety of transaction as well as provide evidence for dispute resolution which are traditionally thought to be the purposes of registration. Even today this conception that title deeds prevail official registry still can be recognized from people’s behavior despite the alteration of law. This observation also urges us to reflect on legal practice: the legislature shall not turn a blind eye to the constant custom, and the judiciary can make room for it as well."