請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/88081
標題: | 論促參案件之爭議類型與相關補償問題 Legal Issues for Types of Promotion of Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects and Related Compensation |
作者: | 許蓓庭 Pei-Ting Hsu |
指導教授: | 林明昕 Ming-Hsin Lin |
關鍵字: | 公私協力,促進民間參與公共建設法,雙階理論,甄審程序,議約,投資契約,行政契約,履約爭議, PPP,PPIP Act,Two-Stage Theory,Evaluation Process,Contract Negotiation,The Concession Agreement,Administrative Contract,Dispute Settlement, |
出版年 : | 2023 |
學位: | 碩士 |
摘要: | 民間參與公共建設法制推行以來帶來許多正面的效益,觀察我國每年透過促進民間參與公共建設法所辦理之案件,無論是件數或是民間所投入的資金資源皆逐年上升。在理想狀態下,若促參案件得以順利運行,可謂「政府、民間、民眾」之三贏局面。
然而,促參案件的現實運作卻常因各種因素中斷甚至提前終止相關的投資契約,無論在締約前或是締約後皆有可能發生。其中,民間機構將有可能因為此些的情事產生損害。而在爭議情事發生時,如何分擔雙方之風險,或是不使民間機構自行承擔,當為討論之核心,此乃為符合促參政策所宣示的民間最大參與及政府最大審慎原則之精神。 蓋若發生爭議時,所有的風險僅由民間機構自行承擔而可能求助無門,將可能導致民間投入促參案件的意願降低,畢竟,法制不完備並不能提供他們相當程度之保障。 是以,本文整理了幾種重要的締約前與締約後的相關爭議類型,前者包含了「甄審程序公平性爭議」與「主辦機關因政策變更不續辦促參案件」;後者則涵蓋了「發生情事變更、不可抗力與除外情事」、「民間機構違約」與「主辦機關違反承諾或協助事項」等案型,爬梳我國的實務與學說,並部分參考日本法制上針對前開問題如何應對處理以為借鏡,進行各個爭議類型中民間機構如何向主辦機關請求損失補償與損害賠償之研析。希冀可以透過本文之探討,使促參法制中針對民間機構的地位保障能夠更加確實與完備。 Since the implementation of the Act for Promotion of Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects, many positive benefits have been brought about. Observing that the number of cases handled in our country through the Act for Promotion of Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects every year, both the number of cases and the capital resources invested by the private institution have increased year by year. In an ideal state, if PPP case runs smoothly, it can be described as a win-win situation of "government, non-governmental, and public". However, the actual operation of PPP cases often interrupts or even terminates the concession agreement in advance due to various factors, which may happen before or after the contract is concluded. Among them, the private institution may cause damage due to these situations, and when disputes occur, how to share the risks of both parties, or not to allow the private institution to bear their own, should be the core of the discussion. This is to comply with the spirit of the principle of maximum civil participation and the government’s maximum prudence declared in the PPP policy. If a dispute arises, all the risks are borne by the private institution and there may be no way to seek help, which may lead to a decrease in the willingness of PPP case. After all, the incomplete legal system cannot provide them with a considerable degree of protection. Therefore, this article sorts out several types of related disputes that are important before and after the signing of the concession agreement. The former includes "disputes over the fairness of the evaluation process" and "the authority-in-charge does not continue to handle PPP case due to policy changes"; the latter covers "events that occurred changes, force majeure and exception for violation ", "Breach of contract by the private institution" and "Breach of commitments or assistance by authority-in-charge" and other types of cases, combing the practice and theory of our country, and partially referring to how to deal with the aforementioned issues in the legal system of Japan. Using this as a reference, we will conduct research and analysis on how the private institution request compensation and damages from the authority-in-charge in various types of disputes. It is hoped that through the discussion of this article, the status protection for the private institution in the PPP legal system can be more reliable and complete. |
URI: | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/88081 |
DOI: | 10.6342/NTU202301352 |
全文授權: | 未授權 |
顯示於系所單位: | 法律學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-111-2.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.37 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。