都市更新與少數之權利人保護

Urban Renewal and the Protection of the Minority

洪任遠(Ren-Yuan Hung)

指導教授 ： 林明鏘

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/法律學研究所/碩士(2008年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2008.02206

摘要

摘要
都市更新為近年來台灣熱烈討論話題之一，政府將其作為解決都市問題與刺激景氣之工具，即透過老朽、頹圮建物之重建、整建、修復，使人民有較佳之生活環境，提升當地之公共安全，亦使建商取得目前都市稀有之土地，而更新後建物價值大幅翻升亦促進地區之繁榮。不僅台灣，世界各國多仰賴其為主要之政策工具。

而我國都市更新之母法-都市更新條例，立法至今不過十年，卻已有多達七次之修法，顯示政府對此工具之重視。然而該法中，不僅涉及人民私權利之分配，於更新實施之時，亦賦與國家(中央及地方政府)或實施者行使公權力之權限，得剝奪未參與之所有權人及所有權人以外之其它權利人之財產權，對於人民權利影響是為重大，故如何避免政府以公益作為藉口，濫行侵害人民權利，是為重要。

本文就目前制度之合憲性檢驗及觀察若干實務判決後，發現我國更新法制主要係委託私人實施及強調更新效率與公益性，故其存有相當之問題。首先於合憲性上，由於目前欠缺強制政府實施更新之義務，於若干政府劃定已久，但缺乏使私人實施之誘因時，多僅能放任該地域頹圮，難謂國家已對人民盡最低生活水準之照護義務；於財產權上，目前亦不問情形，皆以重建方式實施之，亦可能有違反比例原則之處；且價值補償與方式上，亦往往低於市價，且未有充分之補償，被剝奪財產權者難以於當地重置其生活，難謂尊重其人性尊嚴。而於實務裁判上，亦發生事業計畫同意書撤銷之效力、附條件參與權利變換方式之效力無法認定，與估定價額雙方常有不同之認定、欠缺相關正當法律程序設計等問題。

本文認為都市更新是為國家事務，無論政府委託他機構實施或以私人自行成立都市更新會之方式，皆為受託行使公權力。當國家與私人一同執行、或完全交由私人執行該事務時，仍應負有擔保其履行之義務，其須建構合適之制度，且都市更新主要為國家對於住民之關係，故制度建立之時必須以住民之權利保護為中心。

於法制問題之分析、合憲性檢驗、實務判決之討論及日本、英國之都市更新制度為參考後，本文即建立下述原則：為｢住戶｣實施之更新制度、適當情形賦與人民更新之公權利、調整組織以增強資力、雙重同意門檻之保留、對少數人之充分程序保障、完全補償原則。最後即適用上述之原則於都市更新各該階段，以建構保護住民之權利為核心都市更新制度。

關鍵字

都市更新 ； 民營化 ； 公私合夥 ； 國家責任理論 ； 財產權 ； 正當法律程序 ； 完全補償

並列摘要

ABSTRACT
Urban renewal is the most popular issue these years in Taiwan because the government uses it as to solve urban problems and to stimulate economic conditions. That is, by reconstructing, repairing the old and dangerous architecture, residents could thus have a better circumstance and the infrastructure there could be promoted. Moreover, it could also help land developers get rarely-found land in the city. Furthermore, because the value of renewed buildings would strongly increase, the area would thus become prosperous. Not only Taiwan takes urban renewal as a major urban policy. Other countries do so as well.

The act on urban renew affair, the Urban Renewal Act, was enacted in 1999. Since its enactment, there are seven revisions in less than ten years, which shows us how much the government has been relied on it. However, the act is not only concentrated on the distribution of private interests, but also on the authorization of the executive, and on the deprivation of the property of the owners. Due to the serious influences urban renewal has on the residents, how to avoid government taking “public benefit” as an excuse to harm the residents is an important issue nowadays.

This thesis finds out the act emphasizes chiefly on public benefit, efficiency, and privatization, which causes lots of problems. The thesis will examine, firstly, the constitutionality of the Urban Renewal Act and, secondly, relevant cases in the administrative courts and thirdly, comparative urban regeneration systems in Japan and British.

The thesis analyzes the constitutionality from three aspects: the protection of property right, right to life and personal dignity. From the property right aspect, the act fails to take every condition of the buildings into consideration, restricting renewal to reconstruction; thus, it would not meet the challenge of proportionality. Besides, the compensation made to the residents is always below market price, which makes it hard for them to restart their life in nearby area; thus, their personal dignity is ignored to some extent. From the aspect of right to life, the act fails to make carrying out urban renewal plans a duty of the government, which ends up that certain renewal plans have been provided for a very long time without accomplishment owing to lack of private inducement.

By observing the cases in the courts, the thesis finds some problems in the act, for example: the validity of withdrawing the plan agreement, the validity of joining the distribution plan with conditions, the disagreement on the value evaluation, and the lack of due process of law in the renewal course.

The thesis concludes that urban renewal, no matter what kind of roles privatization plays in the process, is a national duty. In short, the government shall guarantee the renewal tasks are fulfilled. To establish an adequate resident-centered urban renewal system, the following requirements should be met: empowering residents to request the government taking charge of renewal task, adjusting the renewal institution to raise funds, and fully compensating people whose property is deprived.

並列關鍵字

Urban Renewal ； Privatization ； PPP ； Property Right ； Due process of law ； Full Compensation

參考文獻

5. 林明鏘，都市更新法制之研究，國科會專題研究成果報告，1995年7月

7. 林明鏘，論德國都市更新制度－兼論我國都市更新法制，歐美研究二七卷第二期，民國1997年

8. 林明鏘，論我國都市更新法制，臺大法學論叢，第二十六卷第三期，民國1996年

18. 陳立夫，都市更新與土地徵收--釋都市更新條例第二十五條之一修正條文，本土法學雜誌，73期，民2005年8月

23. 游振輝，都市更新權利變換前價值評估之探討，土地問題研究季刊，2004年12月