论文部分内容阅读
受文化传统及经济社会的发展,优先购买权制度具有悠久的历史渊源,其设立也是利益平衡价值衡量的结果。在我国现行的民商事立法中多处规定了同等条件的优先购买权,散见于承租人、股东、合伙人、外商投资企业清算中。理论界也存在绝对同等说、相对同等说、列举说,但是对优先购买权的“同等条件”却没有给予明确判断标准,使“同等条件”的价值付之阙如。此次物权法解释一以列举的方式规定了按份共有中优先购买权的“同等条件”的判定标准,为司法实务界提供了判决指引,但“等”字又留有自由裁量的空间。本文将对优先购买权“同等条件”的判断标准进行扩展探析。
Subject to cultural traditions and the economic and social development, the system of preemptive rights has a long history and its establishment is also the result of balancing the value of the interests. In our current legislation on civil and commercial affairs, the preemptive rights on the same conditions are stipulated in many places and scattered in the liquidation of lessees, shareholders, partners and foreign-invested enterprises. There is also an absolute equality in theorists. Relatively speaking, the enumeration said, but the “equal conditions” of the preemptive right are not given a clear standard of judgment, so that the value of “equal conditions” is not paid. The interpretation of the Real Right Law enumerates by way of enumeration the judgment criteria of “equivalent conditions ” for preemptive rights in shares by share, which provides the judicial practitioners with guidelines for judgments. However, the words “et al.” Are discretionary Space. This article will expand the analysis of the judgment criteria of the preemptive right “the same conditions ”.