(34.204.185.54) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/04/11 06:37
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:游子于
研究生(外文):Tzu-yu Yu
論文名稱:事實及理由的論述與民事訴訟判決結果關聯性研究─以情事變更原則為中心
論文名稱(外文):A Study on the Relatedness between the State of the Facts and Reasons Associated with the Civil Judgments ─ Based on Change of Circumstances Principle
指導教授:伍勝民伍勝民引用關係
指導教授(外文):Sheng-min Wu
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:朝陽科技大學
系所名稱:營建工程系碩士班
學門:工程學門
學類:土木工程學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2012
畢業學年度:100
語文別:中文
論文頁數:119
中文關鍵詞:事實與理由情事變更原則民事訴訟工程爭議
外文關鍵詞:facts and reasonsapplicable principles of changed circumstances fconstruction disputescivil litigations
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:513
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:73
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
近年來,國內營建工程爭議的解決途徑偏向於民事訴訟,但承辦訴訟的法官並未擁有工程的專業背景,對於雙方在「事實及理由」中的陳述是否能完全了解,本文主要是以具備工程專業背景以及所習得些微的法律知識與客觀第三者立場,對以情事變更原則所提起之工程訴訟案件進行分析,就訴訟雙方在「事實及理由」中對於情事變更原則要件的陳述,是否會影響裁判結果。承辦訴訟案件的法官所具備之專業為法律非營建工程,當事人要說服法官,其提起之工程爭議有情事變更原則之適用,須對情事變更原則五項要件陳述充足,對於法院的裁判結果也會相對的有利於陳述充足之一方。本文將構成情事變更原則的五項要件區分為二,其中,須有情事變更之實及情事變更須發生於法律關係成立後,法律效果消滅前,這二項要件,是以情事變更原則提起訴訟案件是否成立的最低門檻,所以不進行量化。在「事實及理由」中,非當事人所得預料且有不得預料性、因不可歸責於當事人之事由而發生及情事變更後如仍貫徹原有之法律效力則顯失公平,這三項要件應為當事人攻防之重點。本文對雙方攻防之重點三要件進行量化,首先對三要件重要性給予權重分數,再依當事人在「事實及理由」中對情事變更原則要件論述的詳細程度給予分數。為避免影響案例分析之結果將非工程爭議案件與「事實及理由」中採取消極態度論述案件刪除。
從案例分析中,所得分數高低是依照當事人對「事實及理由」中的陳述內容是否詳細完整而來,從案例當事人對「事實及理由」論述的得分高低與法院判決結果相互對照,可發現案例中得分越高者往往都是贏得判決那一方,當事人所得論述內容的分數越高,贏得勝訴的機率也愈高。而案例分析結果也顯示出,依情事變更原則提起之訴訟案件,若當事人在「事實及理由」中的情事變更的三項要件有越詳細的論述,得到分數越高,贏得訴訟機率也越高。從本文對案例分析結果與法院判決相互比較,可得知「事實及理由」的論述與是否贏得訴訟的相關率高達91%,可以確定,「事實及理由」的論述詳盡與否和取得有利的民事訴訟的判決機率有著相當高的關聯性,本文認為若往後有工程有情事變更原則之爭議,於「事實及理由」中對情事變更原則的三要件做詳細的敘述,贏得有利判決的機率將近9成之多。
In recent years, the way of resolving disputes in domestic construction engineering has been towards civil litigations. However, the litigation judges do not have the professional background, and whether they can fully understand the “facts and reasons” in statements from both parties. This paper is mainly to conduct analysis of construction lawsuits arisen from the principles of changed circumstances based on the professional construction background with a slight legal knowledge and from a third party’s objective point of view to study if the statements of “facts and reasons” from both parties will affect judge’s ruling subject to the principles of changed circumstances. Litigation judges have their professional background in laws but not in construction engineering; therefore, the litigant parties have to convince the judge. There are applicable principles of changed circumstances from construction disputes. It is necessary to give an adequate statement of five elements of principles for changed circumstances, which will be advantageous to the party who provides a sufficient statement relevant to court’s judgment. This paper divides the five elements of principles in constituting changed circumstances into two. Among which, first of all, there is a fact of changed circumstances; and secondly, the changed circumstances take place after the establishment of the legal relationship and before the eradication of legal effects. These two elements are the minimum threshold whether the case is established based on the principles of changed circumstances; therefore, we did not conduct quantification. Regarding “facts and reasons,” it is unconscionable such as it is not expected from the parties and it is non-predictability, occurrences that are not attributable to the parties, and even after the changed circumstances, the effectualness is still in the process of implementation. These three elements should be the main focuses of offense and defense for the parties. This paper conducts quantification on these three elements of offense and defense for both parties. Firstly, we gave weight scores to these three elements in accordance to their importance. And then we gave scores based on the detailedness in statements of “facts and reasons” towards the principles of changed circumstances from the parties. To avoid the impact on the results of case analysis, we deleted those cases that are not related to the construction disputes and those cases that adopted pessimistic attitudes with “facts and reasons.”
From the analysis of example cases, the high and low of scores are obtained according to the detailedness and the completeness in the statements of “facts and reasons” from the parties. The scores of statements of “facts and reasons” are cross-referenced to the court’s ruling. We found that the party who won the case usually has the higher scores. The party who has the higher scores in the statement also has the bigger chance to win the case. The results of case analysis showed that in the litigation cases arisen from the principles of changed circumstances, if the party gives more detailed statement in the three elements of “facts and reasons” for changed circumstances, the party gets higher scores and the chance to win the case is also higher. The comparison of case analytical results to the court’s judgments, we learned that the interrelations ratio between statements of “facts and reasons” as well as litigation winning is high up to 91%. It can be determined that there is a very high correlation between a detailed statement of “facts and reasons” and the probability of obtaining a favorable judgment of civil litigation. This paper believes that in the future if there are disputes in principles of changed construction circumstances, having a detailed statement in the three elements of “facts and reasons” subject to the principles of changed circumstances, the probability of winning a favorable judgment is near more than 90%.
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究目的 2
第三節 研究範圍 3
第四節 研究方法 4
第五節 研究流程 5
第六節 本文架構 6
第二章 民事訴訟程序 8
第一節 起訴 11
第二節 法院受理 11
第三節 審理事實及理由與言詞辯論 12
第四節 訴訟判決結果 13
第五節 小結 14
第三章 情事變更原則要件之意義 15
第一節 不可預見及不可抗力之概念 18
第一項 不可抗力之認定 18
第二項 不可預見認定 19
第二節 顯失公平之意義 20
第一項 顯失公平之意義 21
第二項 工程締約後發生之顯失公平 21
第三節 小結 25
第四章 營建工程情事變更訴訟案例之分析 27
第一節 案例探討流程 27
第二節 情事變更原則個別要件之量化 29
第三節 案例分析結果 34
第四節 訴訟案件論述中相關情事變更議題之若干問題探討 111
第一項情事變更之請求權是否可依契約內容視為當事人予以拋棄 111
第二項物價調整請求權之消滅時效 112
第五章 結論與建議 115
第一節 結論 115
第二節 建議 117
表目錄
表4-1情事變更原則要件之權重分數摘要表 32
表4-2 案例分析評分表格 36
圖目錄
圖1-1 研究流程圖 5
圖2-1 民事訴訟程序 9
壹、專書論著類(按作者姓氏筆劃排列)
1.古家淳,工程契約之病(上),月旦法學教室2008年5月。
2.邱聯恭,程序制度機能論,三民書局,85年8月。
3.程明修,不確定法律概念判斷餘地裁量,行政法,2005 年。
4.謝哲勝、李松金,工程契約理論與求償實務, 2005年11月。
5.劉志鵬,工程契約之時效,工程法律實務研析〈一〉, 2008年1月。
6.駱永家,民事訴訟法,作者自版,88 年3 月。
貳、期刊雜誌類
1.林誠二,「情事變更原則之再探討」,台灣本土法學雜誌,第12期頁。
2.陳坤成,「參閱情事變更原則之再探討」,現代營建第281期,2005年6月。
参、學位論文
1.吳銜桑,公共工程施工履約爭議民事訴訟之研究,國立中央大學土木學系博士論文2010 年。
2.馬永雙,合同法中的情事變更原则適用研究,河北大学法律系。
3.施百鍵,公共工程爭議事件類型與其救濟途徑選擇之研究,國立中央大學營建管理所碩士論文,2004年。
4.詹函心,由不可預見與顯失公平探討工程採購契約範本之履約效果,朝陽科技大學營建工程研究所碩士論文,2007年。
5.簡世明,公共總價承攬工程中實作數量增減之爭議研究,朝陽科技大學營建工程研究所碩士論文,2007年。

肆、網際網路
1.司法院法學資料檢索系統網站,http://jirs.judicial.gov.tw/Index.htm。
2.http://ivy1.epa.gov.tw/noise/dd/DD05/CivilActionFlow.pdf
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔