【正文】 第30頁(yè)。（三）瑞士瑞士國(guó)際私法中在“不動(dòng)產(chǎn)由不動(dòng)產(chǎn)所在地法支配”的前提下，在其105 條對(duì)無(wú)體動(dòng)產(chǎn)如債權(quán)、有價(jià)證券或其他權(quán)利的抵押，也規(guī)定“由當(dāng)事人選擇的法律支配”，而在當(dāng)事人沒(méi)有作出法律選擇時(shí)，債權(quán)與有價(jià)證券的抵押則應(yīng)由抵押債權(quán)人的習(xí)慣居所地法支配，而“其他權(quán)利”的抵押應(yīng)當(dāng)適用于該權(quán)利的法律（即該權(quán)利的準(zhǔn)據(jù)法）支配。而其中“有最密切聯(lián)系”的自由裁量權(quán)就完全掌握在法院地法官的手中。（二）德國(guó)德國(guó)在《非合同債券債務(wù)關(guān)系與物權(quán)的國(guó)際私法》第43 條規(guī)定了“物之所在地法”原則，對(duì)其43—45 條又依最密切聯(lián)系原則特別規(guī)定：如果某國(guó)法律與各該物權(quán)有比這三條所規(guī)定的法律更密切聯(lián)系的法律，則可適用該國(guó)的法律（第46 條）。此外，此《沖突法重述》還規(guī)定：“根據(jù)具體情況，當(dāng)事人在某物中之權(quán)益，由就該特定爭(zhēng)議依照（該重述）第6 條規(guī)定所確定的與該物及當(dāng)事人有最密切聯(lián)系的州的法律或內(nèi)州法來(lái)決定”。（一）美國(guó)美國(guó)1971 年的第二部《沖突法重述》的一項(xiàng)創(chuàng)新在于它在“物之所在地法”原則之外提出了另一個(gè)可以與之并列適用的沖突原則，即“物之所在地法院將予適用的法律”。因此，在物權(quán)關(guān)系的法律適用原則中適當(dāng)考慮引入“當(dāng)事人意思自治”和“最密切聯(lián)系原則”有利于在保證個(gè)案公正、維護(hù)當(dāng)事人利益的基礎(chǔ)上靈活處理涉外物權(quán)關(guān)系，以應(yīng)對(duì)不斷出現(xiàn)的新問(wèn)題、新情況。“當(dāng)事人意思自治”和“最密切聯(lián)系原則”的出現(xiàn)擺脫了法律選擇的僵硬“系屬”，轉(zhuǎn)而向靈活邁進(jìn)，追求個(gè)案公正和實(shí)體正義。但這卻喪失了沖突規(guī)范對(duì)法律選擇的靈活性，僅僅演化成為僵硬的“系屬”。（二）法律關(guān)系本座說(shuō)有人認(rèn)為，物權(quán)關(guān)系適用物之所在地法，是出于對(duì)薩維尼的“法律關(guān)系本座說(shuō)”完美遵循的考慮。國(guó)際私法正逐步擺脫傳統(tǒng)中建立于地域、主權(quán)之上的立法模式。如，聯(lián)合國(guó)制定一系列示范文本,為各國(guó)立法提供參考，在一定程度上促進(jìn)了法律統(tǒng)一化運(yùn)動(dòng)。盡管在規(guī)范權(quán)力的領(lǐng)域出現(xiàn)的上述主體，并不會(huì)預(yù)示著以國(guó)家為中心的社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)調(diào)整的結(jié)束，但也確實(shí)反映了分配規(guī)范權(quán)力形成的方式發(fā)生了變化。超國(guó)家層面主體和次國(guó)家層面機(jī)構(gòu)的出現(xiàn)，打破了傳統(tǒng)的只能由主權(quán)國(guó)家行使規(guī)范權(quán)力的束縛。因此法律選擇的非主權(quán)化，在最大范圍內(nèi)實(shí)現(xiàn)私權(quán)自治，逐漸成為影響國(guó)際私法發(fā)展的另一條主線，即國(guó)際私法的非主權(quán)化要有所張揚(yáng)。17 世紀(jì)荷蘭法學(xué)家把主權(quán)的概念引入了國(guó)際私法領(lǐng)域, 從那時(shí)起到19 世紀(jì)末,國(guó)際私法的整個(gè)理論與實(shí)踐都與主權(quán)原則發(fā)生了千絲萬(wàn)縷的聯(lián)系。物權(quán)關(guān)系依物之所在地法即是主權(quán)在物權(quán)關(guān)系法律適用方面的體現(xiàn)，因?yàn)槿魏螄?guó)家都不愿讓外國(guó)法適用于本國(guó)境內(nèi)的物。筆者認(rèn)為在處理涉外物權(quán)關(guān)系時(shí)，一定情況下可以適當(dāng)擴(kuò)大物權(quán)法律適用的原則，考慮引入彈性規(guī)則，如“當(dāng)事人意思自治”和“最密切聯(lián)系”原則?！拔镏诘胤ā痹瓌t是物權(quán)法律適用的主導(dǎo)原則，但由于物權(quán)法律關(guān)系所涉及的問(wèn)題和情況十分復(fù)雜，不是單靠一個(gè)原則就能完全解決所有的問(wèn)題的，特別是在如今物的概念有了很大的變化，不能簡(jiǎn)單地認(rèn)為除了極少數(shù)的例外情況，似乎有關(guān)物權(quán)的所有問(wèn)題均可以由物之所在地法支配。例如：《日本法例》規(guī)定：“關(guān)于動(dòng)產(chǎn)及不動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)及其他應(yīng)登記的物權(quán)，依其標(biāo)的物所在地法。因此，動(dòng)產(chǎn)所在地國(guó)認(rèn)為本國(guó)的法律已有必要對(duì)位于本國(guó)境內(nèi)的動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)行使管轄權(quán)。這與當(dāng)時(shí)的國(guó)際民商事交往尚不發(fā)達(dá)，動(dòng)產(chǎn)的種類(lèi)主要限于簡(jiǎn)單的生產(chǎn)和生活資料有關(guān)。這即是物之所在地法原則的最初表現(xiàn)形式。該學(xué)說(shuō)將當(dāng)時(shí)的法律分為“人法”和“物法”兩大類(lèi)。該原則經(jīng)歷了漫長(zhǎng)的歷史發(fā)展過(guò)程，是國(guó)際私法中一項(xiàng)非常古老的法律適用原則。s Block said of the legal relationshipperfect pliance considerations. Savigny and the various civil legal relations linked together some of the region to the region (ie, the Block) to deal with the foreign law as the law applicable to civil legal relations, and on the people, objects debt , procedures were subject to different legal relationships but it is a fixed law. Conflict rules but it lost the flexibility of choice of law, just evolved into a rigid system is. Given the shortings of the theory, conflict rules evolved from mechanical to flexible, from the objective to the subjective norms conflict transition and conflict rules, the bination of the conflict rules of the softeningprocess. party autonomyand theclosest connection principle emerged out of the rigid choice of law system is turned towards flexible, fair and substantive justice to pursue the case. Practice shows that the party autonomyand theclosest connection principle to better safeguard the interests of the parties, reduce the cost of justice, has been accepted by the international munity. Therefore, the relationship between property law principles of due consideration for the introduction of party autonomyand theclosest connection principle in favor of cases in ensuring justice and safeguard the interests of the parties on the basis of foreign economic relationship flexibility to address emerging New problems and new situations.Third, the possibility into reality Given the plexity of the relationship between property rights and property rights emerging field of new problems and new situations, development of the times in some countries have laws in the foreign economic relationship has made a worthy reference for the legislation.(A) of the United StatesThe second part of the United States in 1971, Restatement of Conflict, an innovation is that it objects on the location of lawprinciple put forward another possible addition to the applicable principles of conflict with them side by side, that things will be the location of the court Applicable law. Obviously, this is full of subjective rules of conflict of color once again reflects the judicial practice of the United States tend to flexible method of application, rather than rigid application of rules of style, in order to achieve individual justice purposes. In addition, the Restatement of Conflict of Laws, also states: Under the circumstances, the parties in interest in something, by the respect of the particular dispute in accordance with (the Restatement) to determine the provisions of Article 6 of the property and the parties with the most Close contact within the state of the law or state law to determine. In this way, Restatement of Conflict of Lawsin, it established a matter of local law, things of the local court would apply the law andwith the matter and the parties most closely connected within the state of the law or state law Property relations to solve these fundamental principles of law (B) GermanyGermany in the noncontractual relations and property bond debt of private international law, Article 43 states that the matter of local lawprinciple in Article 4345 of its most closely linked by the principle of special provision: If a national law with the property Rights than the law required these three more closely linked to the law, you can apply the law of the State (Article 46). Have even said that if there is more than things on the location of law, the law more closely, the court may apply the law. Which is most closely connected to the discretion of the court rests in the hands of judges. That is, the law applies to property in the location of property