论空中空间权的所有权属性及行使
|
摘要
传统上,不动产所有权以土地平面为界分为地表及地表上、下空间进行讨论,地下空间的开发和立法发展较快,空中空间相比明显迟延。近年来,以无人机为代表的新科技产品,触动了人们对地表上部空间的权利需求,但空中空间权的属性和行使仍需法律予以解释和明确。地表上部一定范围内的空间,客观存在一项单独的所有权,即空中空间权,它是国家或集体所有的一项财产权。现阶段它的行使方式以公权力为主导,但不应排斥私权利的合理诉求,行使目标是平衡权利的自由与限制。明确空中空间权的所有权属性,是平面土地法走向立体空间法的必然。
Traditionally, the real estate ownership is divided into that of the surface, the upper part of the surface and the lower part of the surface of the earth. The development and legislation of underground space are developing rapidly, and the development and utilization of air space are relatively slow. In recent years, the new technological products represented by unmanned aerial vehicle(uav) have triggered off man's demand for the right of the upper space of the earth surface. However, the nature and exercise of air space rights still need to be explained and clarified by law. There is the objective existence of a separate ownership for the space above the surface of the earth, that is, air space right. It is a property right owned by the state or a collective. At present, the exercise of this right is dominated by public power. However, its exercise should not exclude the legitimate appeal of private rights. The goal of exercising rights is to balance the freedom and limitation of rights. It is necessary to define the ownership attribute of air space right from plane land law to three-dimensional space law.
Traditionally, the real estate ownership is divided into that of the surface, the upper part of the surface and the lower part of the surface of the earth. The development and legislation of underground space are developing rapidly, and the development and utilization of air space are relatively slow. In recent years, the new technological products represented by unmanned aerial vehicle(uav) have triggered off man's demand for the right of the upper space of the earth surface. However, the nature and exercise of air space rights still need to be explained and clarified by law. There is the objective existence of a separate ownership for the space above the surface of the earth, that is, air space right. It is a property right owned by the state or a collective. At present, the exercise of this right is dominated by public power. However, its exercise should not exclude the legitimate appeal of private rights. The goal of exercising rights is to balance the freedom and limitation of rights. It is necessary to define the ownership attribute of air space right from plane land law to three-dimensional space law.
引文
[1]肖军.论城市规划法上的空中空间利用制度[J].法学家,2015(5):72-83.
[2]雷盖伯.德国物权法的新发展[M].刘畅,译.北京:人民法院出版社,2004.
[3]近江幸治.民法讲义Ⅱ:物权法[M].王茵,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2006.
[4]陈祥健.关于空间权的性质与立法体例的探讨[J].中国法学,2002(5):102-108.
[5]王泽鉴.民法物权[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2010.
[6]苏志超.土地立体空间之分层使用与土地“区分所有权”之构想[J].人与地,1987(5):7-8.
[7]约翰·贝德里克,科温·W·约翰逊,罗杰·W·芬德利,等.财产法:案例与材料[M].齐东祥,陈刚,译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2003.
[8]张千帆.城市土地“国家所有”的困惑与消解[J].中国法学,2012(3):178-190.
[9]金俭.不动产财产权自由与限制研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[10]孟繁超,张静.空间权法律问题研究[J].当代法学,2003(2):59-61.
(1)黑飞是对无人机违法违规运行的俗称。
(1)参见《上海市地下空间规划建设条例》第28条;《芜湖市市区地下空间建设用地使用权利用和房地产登记实施细则》第10、14、15、17条;《南昌市城市地下空间建筑物登记暂行办法》第5、6、7、8、9条;《江苏省不动产登记条例(草案)》第42、44条等。
(2)《成都市城市地下空间开发利用管理办法(试行)》第36、37、38、41、42条中均使用“城市地下空间所有权人”的表述,进一步说明了立法者对空间所有权的理解。
[2]雷盖伯.德国物权法的新发展[M].刘畅,译.北京:人民法院出版社,2004.
[3]近江幸治.民法讲义Ⅱ:物权法[M].王茵,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2006.
[4]陈祥健.关于空间权的性质与立法体例的探讨[J].中国法学,2002(5):102-108.
[5]王泽鉴.民法物权[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2010.
[6]苏志超.土地立体空间之分层使用与土地“区分所有权”之构想[J].人与地,1987(5):7-8.
[7]约翰·贝德里克,科温·W·约翰逊,罗杰·W·芬德利,等.财产法:案例与材料[M].齐东祥,陈刚,译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2003.
[8]张千帆.城市土地“国家所有”的困惑与消解[J].中国法学,2012(3):178-190.
[9]金俭.不动产财产权自由与限制研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[10]孟繁超,张静.空间权法律问题研究[J].当代法学,2003(2):59-61.
(1)黑飞是对无人机违法违规运行的俗称。
(1)参见《上海市地下空间规划建设条例》第28条;《芜湖市市区地下空间建设用地使用权利用和房地产登记实施细则》第10、14、15、17条;《南昌市城市地下空间建筑物登记暂行办法》第5、6、7、8、9条;《江苏省不动产登记条例(草案)》第42、44条等。
(2)《成都市城市地下空间开发利用管理办法(试行)》第36、37、38、41、42条中均使用“城市地下空间所有权人”的表述,进一步说明了立法者对空间所有权的理解。