双重所有权是英美法信托制度中精巧的法律制度设计,它与我国单一所有权理念格格不入。由于双重所有权在中国的本土化问题并没有得到妥善解决,由此导致信托财产所有权归属模糊不清、受益权的性质悬而未决、信托登记名存实亡。法律移植的目的不是对国外制度进行形式上的复制,而在于融合于本国的法律体系后能够发挥其制度功能。是否采用双重所有权的形式并不重要,关键是本土化的制度设计能否实现同样的制度功能,这才是移植信托所要进行的最为重要的考量。分析表明,由受托人享有信托财产的单一所有权,受益人享有对受托人的债权请求权,这种本土化设计既可以实现与双重所有权几乎相同的制度功能,有助于双重所有权在中国顺利实现本土化。 Double ownership is a delicate legal system design in Anglo-American legal trust system, which is incompatible with the concept of single ownership in our country. As the localization of dual ownership in China has not been properly solved, resulting in the ownership of the trust property vague, the nature of the right to benefit pending, the trust registration in name only. The purpose of legal transplantation is not to formally replicate the foreign system, but to be able to exert its institutional functions after being integrated into its own legal system. It is not important whether dual ownership should be adopted or not. The key issue is whether localized system design can achieve the same institutional function. This is the most important consideration for transplanting trusts. The analysis shows that the trustee has the sole ownership of the trust property, and the beneficiary enjoys the right of claim against the trustee. This localization design can achieve almost the same institutional functions as the dual ownership and help to achieve the dual ownership in China localization.