「指示給付關係」之不當得利─評最高法院95年度台上字第2610號判決

Unjust Enrichment of the Instruction Payment Relationship of: An Analysis on Judgment T.S.T. No. 2610 (High Ct., 2006)

邱慧洳(Hui-Ju Chiu)

《中正大學法學集刊》 49期 (2015/10) Pp. 143-195

摘要

關於不當得利之成立，受利益與受損害間須具關聯性，此關聯性之判斷標準，傳統上不問不當得利之類型，均以因果關係作為判斷，於晚近，學者認為在給付型不當得利，一方基於他方之給付而受利益，是否致他人受損害，應以給付關係取代因果關係作為判斷標準。於三人關係不當得利案例類型，以給付關係作為判斷標準，更有助於不當得利當事人之釐清。本件地方法院與高等法院判決先後以直接因果關係說與間接因果關係說檢視本案受利益者與受損害者間財產損益變動之關聯性，之後歷審法院始以給付關係取代因果關係作為判斷標準，本文將探究以何者判斷標準決定三人關係不當得利之當事人始為妥適。

關鍵字

給付型不當得利 ； 指示給付 ； 給付關係 ； 直接因果關係 ； 間接因果關係 ； 財產損益變動 ； 第三人利益契約

並列摘要

Regarding the establishment of unjust enrichment, there should be connection between the benefits and losses. Traditionally, the causation is applied to determine the connection between the benefits and losses. In recent years, scholars believe that it should replace the causation by payment relationship to determine the connection between the benefits and losses. In tripartite relationship of payment, determining the connection between the benefits and losses by payment relationship helps in clarifying the parties of unjust enrichment. In this case, district court determines the connection of benefits and losses by direct causation, and high court determines such connection by indirect causation. Afterwards, the courts replace causation by payment relationship to determine the connection between benefits and losses. This article intends to analyze which criterion could be used to properly determine the parties of unjust enrichment in tripartite relationship of payment.

並列關鍵字

Payment Type of Unjust Enrichment ； Instruction Payment ； Payment Relationship ； Direct Causation ； Indirect Causation ； Shift of Assets ； the Third Party Beneficiary Contract

參考文獻

王千維(2007)。在給付行為之當事人間基於不得利而生財產損益變動之不當性。新學林。

王伯琦(1968)。民法債編總論。國立編譯館。

王澤鑑(2006)。債法原理（二）─不當得利。自版。

邱聰智、姚志明修訂(2013)。新訂民法債編通則（上）。自版。

胡長清(1964)。中國民法債編總論。商務印書館。