侯丽 谭逸儒

HOU Li, TAN Yiru

阳光既是一种公共物品，也具有私人权利的属性，此公私双重属性影响了对其进行公共干预或者司法救济。本文从城市规划与法学的交叉视角，结合技术标准、建筑规划法规和司法判例 解析了英国、美国、德国和日本的阳光权制度 。研究发现，各国在平衡阳光权作为公共—私人利益时存在三种立场：美国和德国通过区划/ 建筑法规提供最低标准的采光和日照保障，不认可阳光作为一种私权；英国财产法中的阳光地役权与规划许可审查中的日照保护同时存在，在特定条件下存在相互否定的可能；日本的阳光权是公共物品与相邻权混合的概念，公法负责预先规制，事后救济、纠纷调解通过私法机制解决。 文章进一步分析了中国采光诉讼中的裁判思路和主要争议， 指出现有的阳光权制度呈现出公共利益与私人利益混合、公法与私法交错的结构，其边界的模糊性是争议的来源。在国际比较的基础上，结合《民法典》颁布的背景，本文从地方法规精细化、协商程序制定和物权制度完善等方面，提出了国际经验对于我国完善阳光权保障的启示。

The right to access the rays of the sun can be defined both as a public good and part of private rights. This paper analyzes the different types of rights to light, including the ones in England, America, Germany and Japan, from a planning and law cross-disciplinary perspective. Through analyzing their building codes, planning laws, and judicial cases, the authors identify three models in protecting rights to light as a mix of public-private interests: American and German systems lay down minimum standard of sunlight accessibility for the general public but does not recognize it as part of private property right; in England, “Ancient Lights”, i.e. privatized rights to light has been long recognized as a prescribed easement while there is increasing tension between that and the planning review on sunlight regulation; the Japanese system is a hybrid model including both public regulation, private coordination and judicial review. The paper later examines the judicial rules and controversies in Chinese sunlight lawsuits and proposes suggestions for protecting rights to light in the context of the new Civil Code, based on the international comparative study. Local-specific regulation, rules for privateparty negotiation, and modification of the property-right laws are recommended at last.

侯丽，博士，哈佛大学设计研究生院，城市规划与设计讲师。lhou@gsd.harvard.edu
谭逸儒，硕士，澳大利亚新南威尔士大学法学博士研究生。yiru.tan@unsw.edu.au

• 收起