| 關 鍵 詞： |
行政契約；行政處分；負擔契約；處分契約；附第三人效力之行政契約 |
| 中文摘要： |
行政契約作為審議式的行政治理工具和規範模式，除應辨明契約的法律屬性外，尚須探討行政契約之類型、效力及其履行等相關法律問題，行政契約法學的遞建與延展，方有所憑。本文以最高行政法院 98 年度判字第 1466 號判決為前導案例，透過德國法制、學說與實務之比較，探討行政程序法第 140 條第 1 項之規範意旨及適用範圍。首先辨分「負擔契約」、「處分契約」、「附第三人效力之行政契約」、「單務契約」、「雙務契約」、「無因契約」、「要因契約」等基礎概念之意涵與規範效力。其次，剖析行政契約法的規範特性與體系架構，據此主張行政程序法第140條第1項之適用範圍不應侷限於「處分契約」，而應擴及「負擔契約」。繼之，闡述附第三人效力行政契約之效力及其履行問題。最後，評釋上開判決，總結本文見解，以供學術討論與實務運作之參考。
|
| 英文關鍵詞： |
administrative contract；administrative disposititon；contract with obligatory effect；contract with disposal effect；contract with the third party effect |
| 英文摘要： |
Given that administrative contracts are a tool and regulatory model of deliberative administrative governance, one should distinguish, on top of its legal definition, legal issues regarding its typology, effects and performance. This article uses Decision No. 1466 of 2009 rendered by the Supreme Administrative Court as an example to compare it with relevant theories and practices of German administrative law as well as to discuss the regulatory purposes and applicable scope of Article 140, Section 1 of Taiwan’s Administrative Procedure Act. First of all, this article distinguishes the meaning and the scope of fundamental concepts, such as contracts with obligatory effects, contracts with disposal effects, and contracts with third party effects, as well as unilateral contracts, bilateral contracts, abstract contracts, and contracts with causes. Second, it analyzes the normative characters and the structure of administrative contract law. It claims that the applicable scope of Article 140, Section 1 of Taiwan’s Administrative Procedure Act should not be limited to contracts with disposal effects but should apply to contracts with obligatory effects. Furthermore, it elaborates the effects and performance of contracts with third party effects. To conclude, the article comments on the above-mentioned decision and offers views for future discussions in theory and practice.
|
| 目 次： |
壹、問題緣起
一、訟案經過
二、爭點提要
三、思維層次
貳、基本概念
一、負擔契約與處分契約
二、單務契約與雙務契約
三、要因契約與無因契約
參、規範詮釋
一、行政契約法的規範特性與體系架構
二、行政程序法第 140 條第 1 項之規範意旨
三、附第三人效力行政契約之效力及其履行問題
肆、判決評析
一、行政程序法第 140 條第 1 項之規範目的在避免「賤售公權力」
二、雙務契約、多面法律關係與須經第三人同意之行政契約
三、處分契約＝直接引起第三人權利變動之契約？第三人負擔契約＝約定由第三人對他方為給付之契約？
伍、綜合論述
陸、後設思維
|
| 相關法條： |
 |
| 相關判解： |
|
| 相關函釋： |
|
| 相關論著： |
|