「土地法」第219條有關徵收收回權法制與行使之研究

Research on the Legal System and Exercise of the Right of Expropriation and Repossession under Article 219 of the Land Law

呂宗盈(Tsung-Ying Lu) ； 許琬婷(Wan-Ting Xu)

《規劃學報》 39卷2期 (2021/12) Pp. 23-51

摘要

土地一旦被徵收，原土地所有權人對土地之所有權利就會全部喪失，此對人民財產權之侵害最為嚴重。面對具有公益性的土地徵收，與徵收失效及申請買回對原土地所有權人之保障，爲徵收個案應進行權衡之衝突利益，在徵收個案中決定公、私權益之維護，何者爲優先之重要因素，著實值得加以深入探討與研究。因此，本研究將研究重點聚焦於保障被徵收人最後防線之「收回權」，又因我國之土地徵收制度最早出現收回權之概念，係民國19年公布施行之「土地法」。故本研究以「土地法」中之收回權為切入點，透過探討「土地法」第219條徵收收回權之立法沿革及比較我國另外提及收回權之相關法規（即「都市計畫法」第83條、「土地徵收條例」第9條），最後再論及對我國法制影響深遠之德、日兩國對於收回權之規定。據悉，德國關於回復徵收請求權之件及法規範，距符合「德國基本法」保障人民財產權之意旨仍有相當修正空間，而日本法制中之收回權與我國「土地徵收條例」第9條相同均具有長達20年之權利行使期間，惟其附加的要件卻難以確實保障被徵收人之基本權利，此外，在原土地所有權人已喪失掌控其財產使用狀況的能力，原土地所有權人難以了解該財產之使用是否符合原徵收計畫，且現時社會生活水平及物價與過往不同，「土地徵收條例」中長達20年之收回權行使期間，反而影響被徵收土地使用之安定性，實應重新檢討適用收回權之時效規定餘地，以符合「憲法」保障人民基本權利之意旨。

關鍵字

土地法 ； 都市計畫法 ； 土地徵收條例 ； 土地徵收 ； 收回權

並列摘要

Once the land is expropriated, all the rights of the original land owner to the land will be lost. The infringement of people's property rights is the most serious. What a major land expropriation dispute. Therefore, this research focuses on protecting the final defense of expropriated persons. The ＂right of repossession＂ of the line is also due to the earliest concept of repossession in our country's land expropriation system. The ＂Land Law＂ was promulgated and implemented in the year. Therefore, this research uses the right of repossession in the ＂Land Law＂ as the entry point, and through exploration discuss the legislative evolution of the right of expropriation and repossession in Article 219 of the ＂Land Law＂ Related laws and regulations (ie Article 83 of the ＂Urban Planning Law＂ and Article 9 of the ＂Land Acquisition Regulations＂), and finally discuss the Our country's legal system has far-reaching influence on Germany and Japan's regulations on the right to reclaim. It is reported that Germany's response to the expropriation. The documents and legal norms of the right to claim are still quite far from the intent of the ＂German Basic Law＂ to protect people's property rights. There is room for amendment, and the right of repossession in the Japanese legal system is the same as Article 9 of my country's ＂Land Expropriation Regulations＂. During the 20-year right exercise period, the additional elements are difficult to guarantee the basic rights of the expropriated person. In addition, since the original landowner has lost the ability to control the use of his property, it is difficult for the original landowner to understand the property. Whether the use complies with the original expropriation plan, and the current social living standards and prices are different from the past, the 20-year repossession period in the ＂Land Expropriation Ordinance＂ has affected the stability of the expropriated land use and should be reviewed again. The statute of limitations for the right to reclaim has room to comply with the ＂Constitution＂ to protect the basic rights of the people.

並列關鍵字

Land law ； Urban planning law ； Land expropriation regulations ； Land expr-opriation ； Repossession rights

參考文獻

內政部（2009），「地政法令彙編 97 年版第一冊」，第 365 頁，台北市：內政部。

內政部地政司（2018），「土地法（78 年－107 年）歷次修法沿革」，法規解釋彙編，台北市：內政部地政司。

內政部統計月報「4.2-辦理土地所有權登記」。（更新日期 2020/11/25）

史尚寬（1964），「土地法原論」，第四版，台北市：正中書局。

李鴻毅（1986），「土地法論」，修訂第 21 版，第 957 頁，台北市：三民書局。