公共工程展延工期請求費用爭議探討與處理對策

行政院公共工程委員會為協助各機關辦理公共工程妥為訂定合理工期，避免工期估算不合理，影響廠商投標意願，或工程履約因工期展延發生衍生爭議之情形，以利工程順利執行，雖訂有「公共工程訂定工期參考原則」供各機關參考，然工程履約期間或因不可抗力、可歸責於機關或不可歸責於契約雙方等事由，致使廠商無法於原定履約期限完工時，即有展延工期之必要。惟就廠商而言，展延工期所需面對者，為機關是否同意給付延長履約期間所必須支出之相關費用。然基於某些原因，機關與廠商之間就相關費用之項目與計算方式時有就契約條文解釋產生歧異之爭議，進而產生後續申訴、仲裁甚或提起民事訴訟以謀求解決之情形。本研究期以公共工程採購發生履約爭議之法院判決案例，分析出機關與廠商間，就展延工期衍生相關費用之給付發生見解歧異原因，進而能就相關問題原因提出處理對策。本研究經篩選108年度臺灣高等法院及其分院就公共工程展延工期請求費用有關之15案判決進行分析，認為工程採購契約範本就展延工期廠商所得請求之「必要費用」並無明確定義，為公共工程發生展延工期請求費用爭議案件之根本所在。其次，機關辦理工程採購人員缺乏採購專業知能，甚至有建議廠商藉提起民事訴訟方式爭取權益之情形，亦為形成履約爭議之原因，其結果則為契約雙方於訴訟過程與結果，均需承擔額外之時間及金錢成本。故而本研究提出改善建議如：一式計價之必要費用應於工程採購契約訂定計算基準，惟該基準之訂定應符合相關原則，並不得預先訂定廠商棄權條款、非一式計價之必要費用機關應以實支實付法核實給付、機關應採納採購申訴委員會調解建議，及訂定爭訟案件處理原則、行政院公共工程委員會應建立採購人員證照回訓制並將法院實務見解編為教材等，期能有效減少或降低公共工程展延工期請求費用爭議案件發生之機率，從而避免契約雙方損害之擴大，減少司法資源之浪費。

關鍵字

必要費用；工程管理費；展延工期；爭議處理；工程採購契約範本

並列摘要

Even the Public Works Commission (PWC), Taiwan has published the guideline for establishing a reasonable construction duration principle to other government agencies. Due to the complexity of public works and various uncontrollable factors during construction period, many public projects were unable to complete within the contract period. Therefore, to extend the construction period is necessary to reflect the change due to these unexpected facts. Due to extension construction period, it is concern for contractors whether the owners are willing to pay for the addition costs due to extension of construction period? The owners and contracts may have difference opinion regarding to the estimation the addition cost related to construction items and the associated unit prices and induce contract dispute. This dispute will further result appeal, arbitration, and civil lawsuit. The objective of this study is to review the recent public work contract expense dispute cases due to extension of contract period extension and to find out the induce reasons and to recommend the associated countermeasures. Fifteen public work expense dispute cases from the Taiwan Highest Court House within 2019 were reviewed, these disputes were primarily caused by no clear definition of the “necessary expense” within the contracts. The secondary reasons to cause these disputes are related to the staffs in charge of public works contracts do not have contract managing knowledge or these staffs also commonly encourage contractors to reclaim their funds through civil lawsuit process. As the results, it requires a lot money to the public words owners and the contractors through the timely lawsuit process. The resulting measures include: The estimation of lump sum items shall be clearly defined in the contracts, unit price items are paid by completed works, owners should willing to take the recommendations from Appeal Committee, Government agency should establish the Lawsuit Management criterion, The Public Works Commission should establish re-educated training courses for government agency Buying division staff based upon the information learn from current dispute lawsuit cases in order to reduce the possibility causing future extension construction period induce expense dispute cases. Hopefully, these measures can reduce loss of the owners and contractors, and even could eliminate the waste of justice resources.