政府各機關不作為問題研究-以公共工程為核心

Research On Government's Omission of Public Projects

吳憲彰(Shiann-Jang Wu)

指導教授 ： 謝定亞

國立中央大學/工學院/營建管理研究所碩士在職專班/碩士(2015年)

摘要

工程契約是一承攬契約，本質上因尤其時間長和高風險通常較一般買賣、租賃、借貸等民事訴訟事件較為複雜。若涉及公共建設則更加複雜，因政府和包商議價能力不平等，且政府身為業主亦有許多政策上之限制。
因為工程糾紛不僅牽涉工程契約條款、履約中往來文件解釋等相關法律上認定與適用糾葛，還包括許多工程慣例及工程背景知識，再加上工程本身之複雜性與不可預測性及繼續性，介面整合不易、用地取得不易等問題，更易發生爭議。
又常因設計疏失、設計考量不周、材料規格的變動、管線介面與設計無法配合、地質問題、圖說與標單不符等原因，造成需變更設計，影響工程成本、工期及完工效益，造成爭議不斷，嚴重困擾包商。
這些議題亟需業主和承包商同心合力，克服困難，方能順利完工。承包商工作不力固然當罰，業主負責之工作如有延誤造成承包商損失，亦應給予承包商合理之賠償。在公共工程領域，施工期間業主不作為的態度亦為引起這些爭議最重要的因素。
業主一般負責之工作，常起爭議的有：提供工程用地、提供工程材料、解釋圖說規範不明之處、解決廢土棄置問題、督導其他廠商配合施工及按期估驗給付工程款等。這些爭議可由仲裁或調解迅速解決，但因工程業主較偏好興訟，反造成包商額外財務負擔和抱怨。
無利可圖的營造業有害經濟發展，更使得公共工程無法如期如質完工，造成機會成本和社會成本巨大損失，政治氛圍亦對營造業更不友善。
公共工程業主絕不輕易承認前述因不作為態度所造成之惡果，營造業卻變成替罪羔羊。且被大眾視為弊案叢生、投機份子和不守法的產業。而政府卻仍持續提出各種強化懲罰營造產業的方案或制度。
本研究之目的在界定各種公共工程的不作為態樣原因和定義，尤其業主的態度。希以此研究成果凝聚業界共識，次求凝聚社會力量，再求制度之改善。最重要的是付諸實行，改善制度，使台灣公共工程未來更加光明。

關鍵字

責任轉嫁條款 ； 工程合約 ； 工程爭議 ； 營造業

並列摘要

Abstract
Construction contract is a contractor agreement for work. The nature of this agreement is more complicated than legal issues of Civil law, such as regular bargain, lease and loan agreements, particularly due to the long duration and immense risks involved in a construction project. Issues related to public works are further complicated by the uneven bargaining power between the government and the contractor, as well as the various policy burdens born by government officials, as the project owner.
Construction contract disputes not only arise from contract terms, document interpretation and related legal definition, but also derive from disparity of engineering practice and intrinsic background knowledge of construction practitioners. Furthermore, a construction project often develops interfaces with other projects undertaken by legally irrelevant parties. This creates yet more dispute prone opportunities.
Design errors, changes in specification, conflicts between pipeline design and interfaces, geological problems and inconsistencies between bid documents altogether bother construction contractors extendedly. These factors result in design changes, cost overrun, construction duration extension and other consequential loss and injuries, such as quality defects or site accidents.
The imperative issue is that the public owner work with the contractor in order to encounter and resolve the complexities, as discussed above. And whenever there are legal damages done to the contractor, the legal standing of the contractor shall be fully. In the realm of public works, this would include most importantly the owner’s inactiveness, during the course of contract performance.
Construction contract disputes most frequently attributed to public owners include delays in offering construction site, delivering material, confusing illustration of engineering drawing, mishandling of waste soil, inadequate auditing of work, and delay progress payments. Such disputes can only be efficiently settled by mediation or arbitration. However, court lawsuits are still the more prevalent, due to the same loath attitude uphold by the public owner. This further generates resents and increase financial burdens on the part of the contractor.
A non-profitable construction industry contributes to a dysfunction economy. This in turn degenerates state of public works, in terms of quality and time. Vast opportunity costs and social costs are lost, and the political atmosphere only calls for harsher treatment to the entirety of the construction industry.
Inactive public owners hardly regard this as a fault on their part. The construction industry remains a convenient scapegoat. Despising the construction industry as a cheat commercial player, irrational gambler, or even law-breaking cheater is publically and commonly acceptable. National policies for penalizing construction industry as a whole or individual contractor are abundant.
The aim of this work is to identify the facts and causes of the myriad ineffective aspects in the public work domain, particularly related to the attitudes of public owners. This work expects to advocate feasible concepts and actions, in order to condense consensuses within the industry and the public. Most hopefully, by putting these concepts and actions into reality, the state of public works in Taiwan will look for a brighter future.

並列關鍵字

Indemnification clause ； construction industry ； contract disputes ； construction contract

參考文獻

23.楊佳元，雙務契約給付不能之效力，台北大學法學論叢，第61期，2007年3月。

42.楊智斌、尹碧娟，國外工程遲延分析技術之比較(上)(下)，營建知訊，第281、282期(2006)。

30.林孜俞，總價契約下實作數量增減之爭議，營建知訊，第276期，2006年1月。

70.李家慶，蕭偉松（2005）。承商賠償責任限制之探討。營建知訊，(270)，113-118。

1.林曉瑩、黃麗蓉，論業主與承包商之共同遲延(上)(下)，營建知訊，第269期(2005)。