論公共工程漏項責任之歸屬－最高法院104年度台上字第1513號民事判決評析

An Analysis on Responsibility for the Omitted Items in Public Construction -- With Reference to the Supreme Court Civil Judgment Tai-Shan-Zi No. 1513 (2015)

葉文祥(Wun-Siang Ye)

《法令月刊》 67卷12期 (2016/12) Pp. 86-103

https://doi.org/10.6509/TLM.2016.6712.04

摘要

公共工程「漏項」所衍生之工程款求償爭議，向為我國政府採購機制履約上迭生履約爭議之型態，散見於法院、仲裁庭及調解程序等爭端解決程序中，司法實務及各家論者對於該等爭議之看法不一。所謂「漏項」，本文以為，應係指「工程設計圖說或規範等資訊上所顯示承包廠商應施作之工作項目或工料，未經工程數量清單列入工程之計價項目之情形」。由於招標機關針對公共工程契約結算報酬方式，通常採用「契約價金總價結算」，即所謂總價工程契約。總價工程契約之承商，往往係在得標後，於施工過程中始發現，招標機關即業主所提供之工程設計圖說、施工規範、說明書等資訊，與工程數量清單存有差異或不一致之情形，所謂「漏項」問題由是產生。最高法院104年度台上字第1513號民事判決對於此一問題，本於工程總價契約及政府採購流程等面向，提出與過往裁判不盡相同之見解，深值參考。

關鍵字

公共工程 ； 政府採購 ； 總價契約 ； 漏項

並列摘要

The disputes regarding the public construction claim on omitted item of the bill of quantities (the ＂BoQ＂) can be commonly found in the courts, arbitration institution and mediation procedures. However, the views and opinions of the different judges, arbitrators and scholars are divided on the claim issue and even contradictory. The omitted item of BoQ means that the lump sum contract described certain construction item in its drawings or specifi cations and which is omitted in the BoQ of the contract. The government institutions of Taiwan conduct public construction through the government procurement procedure according to the Government Procurement Act and usually use the lump sum contract form. Often the contractor discovers the omitted item in the BoQ. When the omitted item of the BoQ occurs, the contractor may claim additional payment based on the omitted item of the BoQ; On the other hand, the employer may decline to pay the additional payment based on the standard clause of the lump sum contract stated that the errors regarding items of the BoQ shall not be a ground for adjusting the contract price. The Supreme Court Civil Judgment Tai-Shan-Zi No. 1513 (2015) analyzes the dispute regarding omitted item of the BoQ through different aspects such as the lump sum contract and the procedures of government procurement. The judgment does reflect different views, and the opinions put forward in the judgment are of vital importance.

並列關鍵字

Public Construction ； Government Procurement ； Lump Sum Contract ； Omission of the BoQ Item

參考文獻

行政院公共工程委員會（2011），《政府公共工程計畫與經費審議作業要點》，http://lawweb.pcc.gov.tw/LawContent.aspx?id=FL003747（ 最後瀏覽日：2016/7/8）。

行政院公共工程委員會（2016a），《工程採購契約範本》，http://www.pcc.gov.tw/pccap2/FMGRfrontend/DownloadQuoteFile.do?fileCode=F2016010032（ 最後瀏覽日：2016/7/8）。

行政院公共工程委員會（2016b），《公共工程技術服務契約範本》，http://www.pcc.gov.tw/pccap2/FMGRfrontend/DownloadQuoteFile.do?fileCode=F2016060088 （ 最後瀏覽日：2016/7/8）。

Grigoleit, H. C., & Canaris, C. -W. (2010), Interpretation of Contracts, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1537169 (last visited: 2016/7/8).

王文宇(2003)。民商法理論與經濟分析（二）。臺北:元照。