학술논문
영국의 차임규제에 관한 연구
이용수 34
- 영문명
- Study on the rent regulation in England and Wales
- 발행기관
- 한국민사법학회
- 저자명
- 이은희(Lee, Eun-Hee)
- 간행물 정보
- 『민사법학』제34호, 513~563쪽, 전체 51쪽
- 주제분류
- 사회과학 > 사회과학일반
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2006.12.31
8,920원
구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.

국문 초록
영문 초록
South Korea s Residential Tenancy Protection Act provides that the landlord can increase the rent during the term by reason of a change of circumstances and that the increase should not exceed 5%. Except this provision, the Act imposes no restriction on the rent level. In Korea most residential tenancies has a fixed term of two years. If the landlord requests an excessive rise in rent as the condition of re-grant, the tenant has to move to another house unless he can afford the rent increase. So it is argued that rent regulation should be introduced by reference to policies abroad. I would like to get lessons on rent regulation policy from the history of rent regulation in England and Wales, where since 1915, there have been three main statutory regimes for regulating rents: rent control, rent regulation and assured tenancies scheme. Rent control started in the 1915 legislation and continued through to 1980. Rent controls in 1915 and 1939 were introduced in national emergencies to avoid riots caused by rent rises. The effect of the 1915 Act was to freeze rents at the level which existed on August 3, 1914. The protection of tenants against eviction at the end of their lease was also provided so that the rent control would not ineffective (s 1(3)). This Act was applied to the properties whose net rateable value was £26 (£35 in London) or below. Between the Wars the Rent Restrictions Act were reviewed five times. The Increase of Rent and Mortgage Interest (Restrictions) Act 1919 permitted increases of 10% in rent levels and doubled the rateable value limits. These controls and their subsequent amendments up to 1939, only applied to houses already in existence in April 1919, not to new building. The Rent and Mortgage Interest Restrictions Act 1939 froze rents at their September 1939 levels. These would be 1914 rent plus 40% for (some 3 million) accommodation that had remained subject to control through the inter-war years, or market rents for accommodation that had been decontrolled or had been built after 1919. Decontrol recommenced in the 1950s. By the Housing Repairs and Rents Act 1954 all new housing built or converted for letting was placed outside Rent Act control. The Rent Act of 1957 decontrolled all houses with rateable values above £30(£40 in London). Other properties would be decontrolled when the landlord obtained vacant possession. It was during this period that Mr. Rachman gained notoriety. His strategy involved buying up properties with controlled rents and offering tenants money to leave the property; he relet the properties exploiting the lack of controls on furnished properties. If tenants refused to leave, he made their lives uncomfortable. By the Rent Act 1965 a new system of rent registration was introduced. The rent was to be a fair rent determined by rent officers or rent assessment committees. Rents as registered could be re-registered not less than three years later, which provided a mechanism that could allow for general inflation of costs and prices. The rateable value limits for this protection were set at £200(£400 in Greater London). So most of the houses which had become decontrolled under the 1957 Act were brought within the scope. The fair rents policy marked an implicit acceptance on the part of a Labour government that in general the market is the appropriate mechanism for setting the level of rents in the private rented sector. The Rent Act 1965 did not touch controlled rents. Registered rents were much more advantageous to landlords than were controlled rents under the 1957 Act. The first move to transfer lettings from control to regulation was made by the Housing Act 1969, which provided for such a transfer of dwellings provided with standard amenities and in good r
목차
Ⅰ. 서
Ⅱ. 차임규제의 역사
Ⅲ. 공정차임제도
Ⅳ. 보증임대차제도
Ⅴ. 결
해당간행물 수록 논문
- 유럽연합(EU)에서의 民事法 統一化作業에 관한 硏究
- 雙務契約에 있어서 不安의 抗辯權
- 영국의 차임규제에 관한 연구
- 상속수단으로서의 신탁
- 우리나라 하자담보책임의 본질에 관한 재론
- 아파트 전입주자가 체납한 관리비의 특정승계인에 대한 승계여부
- 債權者 危險負擔에 있어서 債務者의 利益償還義務
- 물권적 청구권의 시효소멸 여부
- 선수전속계약 당사자의 법적 지위
- 의사실현에 의한 계약체결과 청약수령자의 의사
- 회생·파산절차에서의 물상대위
- 보증계약의 특수성과 보증인보호의 문제
- 共同相續人 1人에 의한 單獨自主占有
- 約款에 의한 人格權 侵害와 法律上 統制
- 물상보증인의 지위
참고문헌
관련논문
사회과학 > 사회과학일반분야 BEST
- AI와 디지털 문화 산업의 결합에서 저작권 및 윤리적 규범 준수의 필요성 연구
- 종합병원 간호사의 환자안전문화인식과 조직의사소통만족이 안전간호활동에 미치는 영향
- 인공지능(AI)과 윤리
사회과학 > 사회과학일반분야 NEW
- 중증 여성장애인의 고용차별에 대한 현상학적 접근: 노동시장에서의 이중차별 중심으로
- 산재근로자의 일상생활수행 장애와 자아존중감, 자기효능감 잠재프로파일 유형 분류: 영향요인과 잠재프로파일별 일상생활만족도와 직무만족도 차이 검증
- 고용의무사업체 장애인 근로자 일자리 이동 분석
최근 이용한 논문
교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!
신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.
바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!
