论文部分内容阅读
拾得人拒绝返还遗失物,一般分拾得人拒绝返还和遗失物毁损、丢失,拾得人不能返还。司法实践中这两种类型的案件一般不做区分,《物权法》的规定也不够明确,导致适用法律的错误。笔者认为拾得人拒绝返还案件属于不当得利和侵权竞合;而不能返还只能成立侵权。侵权案件要考虑原被告双方的过错,而不当得利不考虑过错,直接判决返还财产。两者判决可能截然不同,实践中应区别对待。
Pick up refused to return the lost items, the general points of the respondents refused to return and the lost items destroyed, lost, pick people can not be returned. Judicial practice in these two types of cases generally do not distinguish between the “Property Law” is not clear enough provisions, resulting in the application of law errors. I believe that the pick up people refused to return the case is unjust enrichment and infringement competing; and can not be returned only infringement. The infringement case should consider the fault of both the original defendant and the unjust enrichment without considering the fault and directly decide to return the property. The two judgments may be very different, should be treated differently.