论文部分内容阅读
现有法律文本分析表明,《森林法》的林权登记制度符合《物权法》的不动产登记立法精神。但由于立法缺陷,导致实践中林权登记机构办理的“林权证”与《物权法》第127条明示的“林权证”所证明的权利范围不同,即前者是森林、林木和林地权属证书,后者是林地承包经营权证书。从《物权法》文本的不动产的定义和对不动产的列举来看,森林、林木和林地均为独立的不动产,属于应当登记的不动产范围。因此,林权登记机构办理的“林权证”具有物权证明效力,其权利证明范围及于森林、林木和林地。我国不动产统一登记立法应充分考虑已实际发生的林权变动状况,明确林权登记为不动产登记,并规定在不动产登记簿和“林权证”上记载森林、林木和林地的自然状况和权属状况,从而使“林权证”成为名副其实的森林、林木和林地权属证书。
The analysis of the existing legal texts shows that the forest tenure registration system of the “Forest Law” conforms to the spirit of the real estate registration legislation of the Real Right Law. However, due to the lack of legislation, the “forest right certificate” handled by the forest tenure registration authority in practice and the “forest tenure certificate” expressly stated in Article 127 expressly have different rights, that is, the former is a forest, a forest and a forest The ownership certificate, which is a certificate of contractual management of woodland. From the definition of immovable property in the text of the Property Law and the listing of immovable property, forests, trees and woodland are all separate real estates and belong to the scope of immovable property to be registered. Therefore, the “forest warrants” handled by the forest rights registration agency have the effect of the proof of real rights, and the scope of their rights certificates is in the scope of forests, trees and woodland. China’s real estate unified registration legislation should take full account of the actual forest tenure changes, clear forest registration for real estate registration, and provides that the real estate register and “forest ownership certificate ” on the record of the natural state of forest, forest and woodland right Is a status, so that “forest warrants ” become a veritable forest, forest and woodland ownership certificate.