頁籤選單縮合
| 題 名 | 我國都市土地整體開發與使用管制之法制分析:以都市計畫法第17條為中心=Legal Institution Analysis on Integrated Development and Land-Use Regulation in the Urban Areas in Taiwan-Using §17 of the “Urban Planning Act” as an Example |
|---|---|
| 作 者 | 陳明燦; | 書刊名 | 臺北大學法學論叢 |
| 卷 期 | 60 民95.12 |
| 頁 次 | 頁1-3+5-46 |
| 分類號 | 575.1 |
| 關鍵詞 | 都市土地整體開發; 都計法第17條; 行政裁量; 財產權保障; 司法審查密度; Integrated development of urban land; §17 of the “Urban Planning Act”; Administration discretion; Property rights protection; Statutory control degree; |
| 語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
| 中文摘要 | 我國地方政府以市地重劃等工具據以達成都市之「整體開發」,其用意自不容存疑,但因格於「財源短絀」致使無法取得都計區內之公設保留地,從而無法如期核發建築執照與區內之建地所有權人,依規定建照核發屬地方政府之行政「裁量權限」,惟因裁量標準不一而嚴重影響建地所有權人之財產權,經由本文針對都計法第17條分析後得到下述幾點結論: 一、都計法第17條第1項屬行政裁量之「限縮」:都計主管機關於主要計畫發布實施後2年內,即有義務完成細部計畫並發布實施之,除非存有例外情形而得為「例外裁量」,否則即不存有行政裁量之空間,甚至屬「行政不作為 (怠惰)」,很不幸地,證諸實務此一現象卻普遍存在。 二、都計法第17條第2項但書,其行政裁量幾縮減至零:若都計內多數公共設施均已完成者,則基於「保護規範 (目的) 理論」之旨意,則該區內建地所有權人之建築權應屬「可期待性」而得為裁量規範之事項。此時,設若都計與建管機關不核發建築執照將導致區內多數居民之健康與生命嚴重受到威脅,則其行政裁量空間將被縮減至零,故應即核發建築執照。 三、都計法第17條與提升司法審查密度:鑑於以往行政法院對於都計法第17條之審查過於「自我克制」而有「審查不足」之憾,今後似應提升為全面審查,亦即,除對行政裁量之核心部分 (即裁量之逾越或濫用) 仍為有限審查之外,對於其他部分,實應「全面審查」,以符合憲法上財產權保障之意旨。 |
| 英文摘要 | It's not doubtful for the Government to take suitable instruments (e.g. urban land consolidation ) to carry out the so-called “integrated development strategy” in urban areas. However, there are many problems due to the financial gap. And more important matter is the issue of the “construction license”. Recently, the issue mentioned above has becomes much more important because of the scope of administration discretion of relative authority in Taiwan. This article therefore focuses on the statutory control degree using §17 of the “Urban Planning Act”. After analyzing, the following can be proposed. 1.The §17 Ⅰ of the “Urban Planning Act” belongs to the statutory administration. As the authority makes the “master plan” in urban areas into notification, the following “detail plan” must be notified in 2 years except an emergency case. That means there exist not any scope for the administration discretion . 2.The §17 Ⅱ of the “Urban Planning Act” belongs to the field of reductíon of administration discretion. If the most infrastructure in urban areas have been finished, the authority has the obligation to give the land-owner an so-called “construction license”. The reason is in the consideration of the “public interest”. In this case, the scope of administration discretion must be reduced to zero in extremely case. 3. The statutory control degree for the §17 of the “Urban Planning Act” should be strengthened due to the regulation of property rights protection in the “Constitution Act”. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。