透過您的圖書館登入
IP:54.145.12.28
  • 學位論文

論定型化契約條款內容之行政管制

A Study on the Administrative Control of Contents of Standard Form Contract

指導教授 : 林明昕
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


於現代交易發展下,企業經營者使用定型化契約成為消費生活之常態。為避免消費者於契約中產生法律上權利義務失衡之情形,國家有管制之需求存在。而我國對此之管制基本態度,主要係以消費者保護法第17條應記載和不得記載事項公告為基礎,以行政機關為中心,決定何類定型化契約條款應於契約上予以記載、何類條款不得記載於契約中,並使用此等行政管制手段管控定型化契約條款之內容。對此是否符合私法自治之要求,其管制權限屬於何種國家機關,是否造成企業經營者之過度限制,能否通過我國憲法之檢驗,定型化契約條款內容之管制於消費者保護脈絡究竟為何,均有待深入探討。 而日本法上受到社會經濟發展與規制緩和政策脈絡之影響,制定消費者契約法做為消費者保護下,對於不當定型化契約條款內容之控管。其中思想係將消費者做為市場上之主體,以「消費者自立」之角度去架設管制規範,並以司法事後管制為主軸,其思考或可給予我國現行過於偏重行政管制之架構些許啟發。本文希冀透過比較日本法之管制思考與我國差別,能為我國消費者保護之制度中,對於定型化契約條款內容之管制,於不採取過度管制下,尋求消費者保護與市場效率之平衡。

並列摘要


With the development of modern society,the use of standard form contract by business operators has become a normal state in consumer life. To avoid the imbalance between the legal rights and obligations of consumers in the contracts, there is a need for state regulation. The attitude of regulation in Taiwan is based on Article 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, which determines what types of clauses should or should not be included in the contracts and uses administrative control to regulate the contents of the clauses in standard form contract. Nevertheless, some problems that exist in the current legal system. Whether it conforms to the autonomy of private law? Whether it is in the spirit of the Constitution? Whether it results in excessive restrictions on the business operators? Which government agency has the authority to control over this regulations? What is the relationship between the administrative control of contents of standard form contract and consumer protection? All of these problems need to be explored thoroughly. In Japan, influenced by socioeconomic development and the deregulation policy of regulation, the Consumer Contract Act was enacted to protect consumers and to control the contents of standard form contract. The idea is to treat consumers as the main body of the market, set up regulations based on the perspective of "consumer independence" and center on judicial control. Their approachs may give some inspiration to the excessive administrative control in Taiwan. By comparing the differences between the regulatory thinking of Japanese law and that of Taiwan’s, this study hopes to strike a balance between consumer protection and market efficiency under the present consumer protection system without putting excessive regulation to the contents of standard form contract.

參考文獻


中文文獻(筆劃順)
王澤鑑(1983),《民法學說與判例研究第三冊》,自刊。
朱柏松(1999),《消費者保護法論》,自刊。
吳庚、張文郁(2016),《行政爭訟法論》,八版,元照。

延伸閱讀