| 摘要: | 本論文以我國政府採購法中之招標至決標制度為主軸，並比較政府採購協定與新加坡政府採購之相關制度，檢視招標機關在採購時之法規適用外，也讓廠商知悉招標機關何種行為或要求非屬適法。並以「台南科學工業園區減振工法規劃技術服務採購案」為案例，該案例之特色在於採購當時，可謂是全世界首例，在國內外尚無任何案例可循，所以招標文件也無先例可供遵循，造成廠商對於招標機關之行為與招標文件之內容產生爭議時，處理之困難度提高且意見分歧，本論文也將整理相關分歧之處，並提出看法。另外，未來政府採購案再碰到國內外尚無任何案例可循之機會亦非毫無可能，透過本論文佐案例之說明，展現招標機關在政府採購前階段對於招標文件上之各項要求及在操作，得闡釋範圍之界線；再者也讓廠商明瞭，在政府採購前階段，其應該如何爭取法律保障之權益，以及其相關權益範圍之界線。
This thesis focuses on Government Procurement Act from invitation to tender to award of contracts and compares with Government Procurement Agreement and Singapore government procurement system; observes a contracting authority applicable laws and regulations on procurement, and an applicant knowing a contracting authority irregular actino or request. Case in Technical Service Procurement Case of Vibration Engineering Plan at Tainan Science Park, the characteristic of this case was the world's first while procuring, and there was no the same cases consultation. Therefore, the applicant disputed about action and content of the tender documentation by the contracting authority. It was hard to solve the dispute and there were differences of opinion. This thesis will collect those opinions and bring up own opinion. In the future, there may be possible not the same procurement cases, and this thesis not only illustrates the boundaries of a contracting authority explanation for request and operation at the tender documentation, but shows an applicant to fight for legal protection of the rights and interests, and shows the limit of the rights and interests, by this case. |
