競爭法與電業自由化

Competition Law and Its Implications for Deregulation of Electricity Industry

施硯笛(Yan-Di Shih)

指導教授 ： 黃銘傑

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/法律學研究所/碩士(2018年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201803385

摘要

公平交易委員會以國內九家民間獨立發電廠合意拘束彼此營業行為，共同拒絕與台電公司修改購售電契約，構成聯合行為而違反《公平交易法》。然而，於聯合行為爭議期間，我國電力產業結構為單一買方模式，所有民間獨立發電廠唯一售電對象僅台灣電力股份有限公司，顯難以抗衡台灣電力股份有限公司市場力量，故以長期購售電契約約定長達25年交易條件，且電力交易秩序向為經濟部高度管制下所建立，民間獨立發電廠間是否確有競爭關係、本案是否有聯合行為規範介入必要，不無疑問。
本文以民間獨立發電廠聯合行為爭議產生問題意識，欲探討競爭法介入電業自由化秩序之適法性問題。首先，以不同電業自由化模式對應前開聯合行為爭議背景，呈現後續討論之事實基礎。其次，透過《公平交易法》第46條法律位階、立法意旨、審查觀點之全面探討，嘗試為該條文相對抽象規範內同提出層次化之審查架構，以為法制面討論之大前提。審查架構依序包含規範衝突類型化、審查密度、審查基準等三道檢驗層次。
為綜合比較《公平交易法》聯合行為規範與電業自由化相關規範適用於我國電力產業之效果。本文先分析民間獨立發電廠與台灣電力股份有限公司之交易關係是否具備競爭關係，以確認適用聯合行為之實益與適法性。繼而，本文依所提出《公平交易法》第46條審查架構全面檢視電業自由化相關規範是否牴觸《公平交易法》立法意旨。確立保障長期購售電契約、維持電力躉售關係非競爭性乃電業自由政策得以持續推進之基礎，此類政策手段所促進之經濟效益無法為競爭政策取代或彌補。聯合行為規範之介入不僅無助於擴大市場規模、增加競爭者數目、降低市場集中度、降低市場進入障礙、提升消費者利益或降低交易成本等成果，更抑制產業自由化相關規範所達成之經濟成效。
基此，本文認為於單一買方模式之電業結構下，聯合行為規範不應介入民間獨立發電廠與電力獨買事業之交易關係，否則將抑制自由化政策持續引進民間獨立發電廠之成效，妨礙電業主管機關引導電業邁向下一階段自由化。

關鍵字

公平交易法 ； 競爭法 ； 電業 ； 自由化 ； 發電廠 ； 契約 ； 聯合行為

並列摘要

The precedence of competition law over laws of industries has long been an unsettled controversy, especially when the industry is in its course of deregulation. The dispute between the Fair Trade Commission and nine independent power producers (hereinafter IPPs) further stirs up the debate. Whereas advocates for competition policy consider the opening of the market as the ground to apply the law against concerted action, the author doubts the regulator’s intense control over IPPs’ entry and their price negotiation implies any signal of competition among IPPs.
Pursuant to the Fair Trade Act (hereinafter FTA), other laws shall have precedence over the competition law when the legislative purposes of FTA are significantly honored by other laws. This thesis is therefore aimed at developing a framework to review the legitimacy of applying the law against concerted action to a deregulating electricity industry—where each and every IPP must trade with the dominating single buyer.
Firstly, This thesis infers there is no competition among IPPs under the industrial structure as a single buyer model, regardless of whether in the sense of competing under the current transaction condition or in the sense of renegotiating the power purchase agreements (hereinafter PPAs). Therefore, the law against concerted action has no ground to carry out its own merit.
Secondly, this thesis holds it is crucial to recognize terms of PPAs defining rigid bottom lines of IPPs’ long-term profit when the reform of electricity industry is undergoing the phase of single buyer model. It is evenly crucial not to mandate or expect IPPs to “compete” by accepting inferior transaction conditions proposed by their single buyer because the core mission of deregulation in the single buyer model is to keep bringing in new IPPs and investment that prepares the whole industry for further deregulated models.
By applying the framework above mentioned, this thesis concludes the law against concerted action shall not be applied to the electricity industry when the reform is undergoing the phase of single buyer model.

並列關鍵字

Fair Trade Act ； competition law ； electricity industry ； deregulation ； independent power producer ； IPP ； power purchase agreement ； PPA ； concerted action

參考文獻

中文文獻

王澤鑑（2009），《債法原理》，台北：自刊。

何之邁（2002），《公平交易法實論》，台北：自刊。

汪渡村（2015），《公平交易法》，台北：五南。

許志義、陳澤義（1990），《電力經濟學：理論與應用（二版）》，台北：華泰。