解释论下以遗嘱方式设立居住权的生效问题研究
Study on the Validity of the Right of Habitation Established by Testament under the Interpretation Theory

《民法典》规定了以合同方式设立居住权和以遗嘱方式设立居住权两种居住权设立方式，但是对于以遗嘱方式设立居住权的生效问题，《民法典》未明确规定，理论和实务中也颇有争议，需要进一步的解释和研究。居住权并非遗嘱人的财产，而是遗嘱人基于遗嘱为居住权人所创设的权利，其生效要件需要综合考虑物权的变动规则和继承法原理，可以根据遗嘱继承设立模式和遗赠设立模式的不同，适用不同的解释路径：当以遗嘱继承模式设立居住权时，不能参照适用《民法典》第368条的相关规定，而是类推适用《民法典》第230条，居住权自继承开始时生效；当以遗赠模式设立居住权时，参照适用《民法典》第368条的规定，居住权自登记时生效。
The Civil Code stipulates two ways of establishing the right of habitation: by contract and by testament. However, the Civil Code does not clearly stipulate the validity of the establishment of the right of habitation by testament, and it is also controversial in theory and practice, which requires further interpretation and research. The right of habitation is not the property of the heritage, but the right created by the testator for the obligee of the right of habitation based on the testament, and its validity requirements need to comprehensively consider the rules of change of property rights and the principles of inheritance law. Different interpretation paths can be applied according to the different modes of testamentary inheritance and bequest establishment: when the right of habitation is established by the testamentary inheritance model, the relevant provisions of Article 368 of the Civil Code cannot be applied by reference, but Article 230 of the Civil Code is applied by analogy, and the right of habitation takes effect from the beginning of the succession; when the right of habitation is established by bequest model, the provisions of Article 368 of the Civil Code can be applied by reference and the right of habitation takes effect from the time of registration.