公共工程減價收受之訴訟爭議案例分析

A Study on Litigation Cases of Acceptance with Price-Reduction in Public Construction Projects

葉奕穎(Yi-Ying Yeh)

指導教授 ： 姚乃嘉

國立中央大學/工學院/營建管理研究所/碩士(2015年)

摘要

採購法第72條第2項明訂減價收受為甲方於驗收階段可行使之裁量權，其條款之立意乃鼓勵「物盡其用」、「提升公共工程效率」等。然而實務上，機關辦理相關案件往往從嚴認定，亦或付諸爭議處理程序後方同意減價收受，因而造成諸多爭議。
本研究由「司法院法學資料檢索系統」中，篩選出90~103年間涉及減價收受之102件訴訟案例進行分析。案例分析結果顯示減價收受案件上訴維持率較低，且易發生於「公告金額以上未達查核金額」之採購。其次，常見之爭議態樣分別為適用性、責任歸屬、減價金額計算、罰款額度以及其他爭議五種類型；爭議標的物常見之類型則依序為工料、規格、施工方法及尺寸。此外，由統計結果可知目前減價額度訂定範圍由「不符項目標的之契約價金」2%至6倍，其中尤以1倍最為常見；而違約金範圍則以減價金額之10%至6倍，又以6倍及「有減價額度無違約金」兩種類型之比例最高。
本研究整理案例判決結果與專家訪談後，提出5項契約面以及3項執行面之改善建議。在契約方面，甲乙雙方於訂約時，明訂減價及違約金總額上限規定之文字敘述、載明是否加計間接費用、條列計算方式以及採用通用詞彙。在執行方面，廠商應確實依約施作，有給付不能、原設計不當等情況時立即反映；機關則應謹守減價收受要件、原則，留意請求權時效，並加強履約過程之監督。本研究之成果可供相關單位參考，期使減價收受制度更趨公平、合理、有效，減少爭議之產生。

關鍵字

公共工程 ； 減價收受 ； 驗收爭議 ； 訴訟爭議

並列摘要

The second paragraph of Article 72 of the Government Procurement Act states that “an acceptance with price-reduction may be conducted under conditions,” which shows it is one of the discretionary rights of the government agency during the handover stage. The purposes of this article are to save unnecessary waste or to promote efficiency of the procurement. However, many agencies tend not to apply this article by insisting strict standards even when the conditions are obviously applicable, or until dispute resolution processes are completed. Construction disputes often arise from such cases.
This research collected 102 litigation cases which were related to “acceptance with price-reduction” in public construction projects from a litigation database retrieval system of the Judicial Yuan. Case analyses reveal that certain procurements with less contract amount having sentence results not highly maintained if appealed. The most often seen cases can be categorized into five types: applicability, responsibility, reduction amount, penalty, and others. In addition, the price-reduction ranges between 2% and 6 times of the amount of non-conformity, in which one time is the majority. As for the penalty, it ranges from 10% to 6 times of the reduction amount; while 6 times or none with price reduction, are the most common ones.

This research proposed 5 and 3 suggestions for improvements from contractual and executive aspects, respectively. From the contractual aspect, it is recommended that maximum price-reduction amount, maximum penalty, related indirect costs, and tabulated calculation be clearly stated, and only common words be used instead of litigation vocabulary. For the executive aspect, the contractor should comply with the drawings and specifications, and should be responsive if difficulties arise; the government agency should follow the article when applicable, minding the statute of limitations, and enforcing supervision during contractual performance. These research results can serve as useful references to both the contractors and the government agencies to reduce disputes and to achieve a fair, reasonable, and effective environment when applying the “price-reduction” article.

參考文獻

[14] 林孟潔，工程技術顧問公司與機關訴訟爭議案例之探討，國立中央大學碩士論文，2014。

[5] 林瑞東，公共工程採購爭議與處理機制之研究，國立成功大學碩士論文，2009。

[12] 許增如，政府採購法減價收受制度之研究，國立政治大學碩士論文，2009。

[1] 司法院法學資料檢索系統，http://jirs.judicial.gov.tw/Index.htm。

[2] 政府採購法，2011年01月26日。