公共工程契約義務之研究─以業主協力義務為中心

Research on Contractual Obligations: Focusing on Employer's Obligations to Cooperate

許正欣(Chen-Shin Hsu)

指導教授 ： 陳聰富

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/法律學研究所/碩士(2014年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2014.02567

摘要

於工程實務上，業主並非僅有給付報酬之契約義務，尚有提供承包商相當協力服務之法定義務，其法律依據在於民法第507條規定。然而，業主何時負擔協力義務，以及協力義務之範圍為何，甚或於業主違反協力義務時，承包商可否捨本條而求諸債務不履行規定資為主張，均未臻明確。惟綜觀上開諸多爭議之源頭，無非是該條規定協力義務之性質不能清楚納入傳統繼受德國法中的義務分類所致。意識上開問題根本，本論文於第貳章即就本條之義務性質加以探討，並輔以英美法之默示擔保義務理論(implied warranty/term)，檢討繼受德國法義務群分類不妥之處，並認為該條規定之義務性質應為真正義務，至於義務成立之判斷標準，雖國內實務與學說咸認應以誠信原則為斷，然而其具體內涵未臻明確，恐有流於恣意，故應改以效率(efficiency)作為判斷基準，衡量雙方對於義務負擔所生之成本高低資為論斷。
於肯認業主負有一定程度之協力義務後，若業主違反該義務，承包商得如何主張權利，則為本論文第參章所討論之內容。鑑諸英美法及國際契約範本，承包商得主張之法律權利具有多樣化之趨勢，藉以反思我國實務判決囿於民法第507條規定之性質所衍生之法律效果見解，應有借鏡之空間與必要，方能妥善兼顧業主與承包商間之權益平衡。
至此，業主之協力義務規範或以完整檢討完畢，然而，該義務可否透過契約約定加以排除，以降低業主之法律成本，不無疑問。此等問題涉及民法最傳統的契約管制問題，於實務上迭生爭議，此為本論文第肆章所探討之內容。本文佐以英美法中關於免責約款(No-Damages-for- Delay clause)之實務見解，重新省思我國契約管制之方式，以求雙方權益之平衡，並符合公平正義之理念。
最後，本論文第伍章則就現今工程實務上所涉及之重要協力義務爭議，套用前揭本文主張之論理予以詳加分析，期能提供不同思維以利業主與承包商間之權益獲得合理之對待與維護，亦有助於未來工程環境之塑造。

關鍵字

民法第507條 ； 協力義務 ； 默示擔保 ； 效率 ； 免責約款

並列摘要

Under the practice of construction, the employer is not merely burdened with the obligation to pay, but undertaken with some kind of legal obligation to cooperate, which is governed by ROC Civil Code Article 507. However, this regulation does not provide with the answer to when this obligation falls on the employer, how far is the content, and whether the contractor is able to claim with other rules except this regulation once the employer breach the duty to cooperate. On analysis with those questions, the source of those is the difficulty on identification of the duty to cooperate under the categories of obligation deriving from the German Law. From this viewpoint, Chapter Two starts from synthesizing whole ROC judgments, following by comparison with Implied Warranty/Term in English Law, in order to review the categories of obligation deriving from the German Law. Furthermore, the thesis argues that the duty to cooperate is the real obligation, which is formed by determination of efficiency, rather than the abstract and ambiguous “good faith” selected by ROC jurisdiction and theories.

Second, the right for the contractor to claim while the employer breach the duty to cooperate is the topic of Chapter Three. English Law and International Contract Model furnish with a great diversity of right for the contractor to claim against the employer, which strictly reflects the disadvantages of ROC Civil Code Article 507.

Third, whether the employer’s duty to cooperate can be exempt from the clause or contract, relating to the regulation of contract, is the great disputes on practice and will be discussed at Chapter Four. The thesis will compare with the jurisdiction on No-Damages-for- Delay clause in English Law and the ROC judgments at first, then jump to some useful and fairly conclusion.

Finally, the thesis will utilize the concept mentioned above to discuss with some kinds of disputes on duty to cooperate in construction practice at Chapter Five. Through the complete and carefully analysis on each categories of dispute, the thesis eventually jumps into conclusion at Chapter Six.

並列關鍵字

Civil Code Article 507 ； duty to cooperate ； implied warranty/term ； efficiency ； No-Damages-for- Delay clause

參考文獻

24. 姚志明，營建工程承攬契約訂作人協力義務之性質─評最高法院九十九年台上字第一O九六號民事判決，月旦裁判時報第6期

25. 姚志明，營建工程契約協力義務之研究，東亞法學評論創刊號，2010年3月

33. 陳佑寰，真正還是不真正？論工程契約中業主協力行為之性質─最高法院97年台上字第360號民事判決評釋，法令月刊第62卷第8期。

50. 詹森林，公共工程定型化工期展延條款之實務問題，法令月刊第61卷，第8期

23. 吳若萍，公共營建工程契約中遲延完工之問題研究─以不可歸責於承攬人為中心，台灣大學碩士論文，2008年