抵押权与留置权作为担保的重要形式,都具有物权的性质,二者都是担保物权,都是为了督促义务人履行义务、保证债权人的权利不受侵犯而设立的,因而都享有优先受偿权。但在实践中,常常出现抵押权与留置权同时存在于同一标的物的现象。这种情况下,哪个享有优先受偿权呢? 此问题我国民法无明确规定,学术界也有一些不同看法。如郭明瑞同志认为“抵押权与留置权并存时,应按其成立的先后顺序优先受偿。”王保树同志认为“由于留置物本身就存在于债权人手中,一旦债务人不履行义务,债权人较抵押权人有更主动的优先受偿权。” As an important form of guarantee, mortgage and lien are all property rights. Both of them are security interests, all of which have the priority in order to urge the obligor to fulfill their obligations and ensure that the rights of the creditors are not infringed. Remedy. However, in practice, the phenomenon that mortgages and liens coexist in the same subject often occurs. Under such circumstances, which enjoys the priority of compensation? This issue is not clearly defined in civil law in our country, and academics also have some different opinions. For example, Comrade Guo Mingrui held that “when a mortgage and lien coexist, they shall be given priority in the order in which they are established.” Comrade Wang Baoshu held that “since the dwelling place itself exists in the hands of the creditor, once the obligor fails to perform its obligations, More active priority of compensation. ”