| 關 鍵 詞： |
不對稱管制；市場主導者；有效競爭促進；電信自由化；行政計畫；確定計畫裁決；管制裁量；計畫裁量；過渡性管制措施 |
| 中文摘要： |
為加速該市場競爭秩序之形成，國家通訊傳播委員會於 2008 年 1 月 16 日以公告「行政計畫」之方式，課以市網業務市場主導者「過渡期費」支付義務之不對稱管制措施，並導入擴大市網用戶平等接取之機制。行政法院關於此行政計畫爭議所作出之裁判，存有兩點釋義學操作上之謬誤：其一，無視於系爭行政計畫實質內涵之多樣性，一律取徑於「確定行政計畫裁決」機制，將其整體視為單一行政行為；其二，混淆行政處分「行為形式定性」及「內容合法性」兩不同層次之問題。本文認為系爭行政計畫實則係由「具行政處分性質」及「具法規命令性質」兩部分所共組而成。至於對系爭不對稱管制措施實質合法性之審查，德國聯邦行政法院所發展出之「管制裁量理論」可資借鏡。
|
| 英文關鍵詞： |
asymmetrical regulation；dominant market players；promoting effective competition；telecommunications liberalization；planning；German-style planning process；regulatory discretion；planning discretion；transitional regulatory measures |
| 英文摘要： |
On January 16, 2008, the National Communications Commission（NCC） announced its planning measure aiming at enhancing competitiveness in the local network markets in Taiwan. Under this asymmetrical regulation promulgated by the NCC, the dominant market players in local networks were required to pay a “transition fee,” and mechanisms were introduced to extend equal access to services for local network users. The legality of the planning measure was challenged, and was upheld first by the Taipei High Administrative Court and ultimately by the Supreme Administrative Court. In reviewing the series of decisions by the administrative courts against the doctrines of the administrative law, this article argues that the courts’ reasoning was flawed in two respects. First, both courts oversimplified the complicated planning measure at issue and erroneously characterized it as a single administrative action made according to the German-style “planning process.” Second, the courts confused the characterization issue with the legality issue. This article proposes that the NCC’s planning measure shall be characterized and scrutinized as composition of “administrative disposition” and “administrative regulation”. As to the substantive legality of the asymmetrical regulation in question, the courts did not clarify what should be taken into consideration under which level of judicial scrutiny. This article suggests that the “regulatory discretion theory” developed by the Federal Administrative Court of Germany offers useful guidance in this regard.
|
| 目 次： |
壹、裁判背景及提要
一、事實概要
二、原告之主張
三、裁判要旨及理由
（一）程序部分
（二）實體部分
四、爭點整理
貳、「不對稱管制」作為民營化結果法之構成要素
一、不對稱管制與民營化之關連性
二、不對稱管制架構之特性
（一）目的取向性
（二）過渡性措施
（三）以市場主導者為管制對象
三、不對稱管制之法律上評價
參、不對稱管制架構之具體形塑
一、行政計畫作為不對稱管制架構之形塑手段
二、系爭行政計畫之法律性質
（一）行政計畫法律性質之判斷基準
（二）系爭計畫法律性質之認定
三、小結
肆、不對稱管制之司法審查
一、法律保留原則之適用問題
（一）行政法院之見解
（二）系爭行政處分違法判斷基準時點之擇定
二、實質合法性之司法審查密度
（一）德國聯邦行政法院對「管制裁量」概念之提出
（二）管制裁量理論對本件訴訟之啟示
伍、結論
|
| 相關法條： |
 |
| 相關判解： |
|
| 相關函釋： |
|
| 相關論著： |
|