Abstract:Many scholars attach importance to the dissension of dual real estate transaction in different countries. The solution to this problem involves some different fields in civil law. Owing to the not-quite-the-same basic principles adopted by the different countries in civil law, some inevasible diversity exists between the law theory structures that are taken in dissension solution. However, this diversity is just because different countries want to maintain the coherence in its own law theory system. Instead of hypostatic difference, there exists certain commonness between different countries when they take the essential value judgment in settling the dissension. Altogether, the core value judgment in this problem is that law should be expected in what area to respect and to protect the free competition right of the second buyer.According to the German law, the French law and the Japanese law, and the experience of comparative law, generally the efficacy of the Second Contract which is a breach of morality can’t be protected by the law. And to judge whether the behavior of the second buyer is a breach of morality becomes the key to the settlement of the dissension. The judgment of breach of morality is not only affected by the registration system, but also closely related to the actual possession of estate. Notwithstanding, the provisional registration system for the transfer of real property established in the Property Law of the People’s Republic of China has some precautionary effect, but it can’t prevent the dual real estate transaction completely. Therefore, in judicial practice, we should set up a balancing of interest system which is based on the provisional registration for the transfer of real property to settle the dissension.Superficially, this paper is just talking about the value judgment in dual real estate transaction dissension. In fact, however, the core judgment of this problem is closely connected with the meaning of estate public announcement system. Consequently, the value judgment system discussed in the paper can also be used in other types of dissension in the transfer of title.After the adoption of the Property Law of China, some correlative theory structure has been established. The next research emphases should be to explain and apply the articles of the Property Law correctly. And the establishment of balancing of interest system is more important to the application of the Law.

Paradox of Conflict Law: Value Orientation and Technology System Tensility

Legal Realism and Criminal Justice in Transitional Society

Paradox of China's Jurisprudence in Course Of Social Development

On the Five Paradoxes in the Process of Contemporary China's Lawful Rule

On the Conceptual Structure of the Legal System:From the Perspective of the Jurisprudence of Value

Administration of Justice and Multimodality in Media: Semiotic Translation, Conflict and Compatibility

Law As a Culturally Constituted Sign-System – A Space for Interpretation

Combine, Conflict, Harmony:The History Track of Dialectical Interactive Movement Between the Western Religious Divine Nature and the Law Logos

Weighing and balancing of principles in cases with rule paradoxes

The Paradox of Popularizing-law

Value Conflicts of Education Law and Its Reappraisal in China

The Equity of the Conflict of Interest in Dual Real Estate Transaction

Transformation of Paradigm in China's Foreign Trade Administration Law

From Contingencies To Paradoxes Exploring Tensions In Research On Alliance Portfolios And Innovation

Legal Paradox and It's Productiveness

The Value Collision and Value Integration under the Pluralism

Contradictions, Conflicts, Dilemmas and Temporary Resolutions: A Sociology of Law Analysis of Shari’a in Selected Western Societies

Peace and Conflicts: Six Questions China Confronts--A Chinese Civilization Legal Professional's Nationalism Text

Chinese Legal Culture: From Tradition to Modernity

Exploring Solutions to the Conflict between the Ownership of Trust Property and the Numerus Clauses

Adaptive Justice in the Chinese Context: Law versus Commonsense