The introduction of Purchase Money Security Interest (PMSI) to our country has expanded China's system of security interests. The structures of title retention and financial lease created based on parties' consensus are blurred by the function of security, deviating from the legal property rights, ignoring the true legal meaning of parties, and resulting in the effectiveness equivalent to security interests. Although title retention, financial leasing and PMSI all have the functional value of guaranteeing price claims, and Article 388 of the Civil Code has enriched the content of guarantee contracts by introducing the registration opposition rule into atypical guarantees, we should still adhere to the system logic of the dichotomy between property and debt in the Civil Code, and draw a clear line between the two under the principle of legal property rights. The influence of guarantee functionalism should be limited to expanding the scope of "other contracts with guarantee functions" in Article 388 of the Civil Code. The retention of ownership and financial lease in Article 57 of the Judicial Interpretation on the Guarantee System are actually linked to PMSI after being attached with various conditions, which is fundamentally different from the original system structure of Articles 641 and 735 of the Civil Code.
Read full abstract