行政不作為與國家賠償責任—兼論公有公共設施設置管理欠缺

文化大學機構典藏 CCUR > 法學院 > 法律學系暨法律學研究所 > 博碩士論文 > Item 987654321/45159

jsp.display-item.identifier=請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://irlib.pccu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/45159

题名:	行政不作為與國家賠償責任—兼論公有公共設施設置管理欠缺 Administrative Inaction and Governmental Tort - with an Aspect to the Fault of Public Construction
作者:	郭旭芬
贡献者:	法律學系
关键词:	國家賠償行政不作為司法院釋字第469號解釋主觀公權利小林村滅村國賠案
日期:	2019
上传时间:	2019-10-28 14:55:20 (UTC+8)
摘要:	自司法院釋字第469號解釋參酌德國法之保護規範理論，重新詮釋怠於執行職務並開拓其內涵後，行政機關及司法實務判決對於怠於執行職務之判定，即以該解釋之意旨為依歸，並以「裁量權收縮論」作為其判斷基準。倘若法律賦予該公務員有因時因地或其他考量為行政裁量時，該管公務員並無「已無不作為裁量餘地」之作為義務，即使該公務員之裁量適當與否縱有爭議，亦非「公務員怠於執行職務」之情形。然而，面對小林村滅村之慘劇，此法律見解固符合國家賠償法第2條第2項後段之通說見解。惟將怠於執行職務之國家賠償要件門檻提高，成立不易；過度限縮「怠於執行職務」僅限於「裁量收縮至零」，而忽略雨量之可預測性及緊急撤離居民之可期待性，徒以缺乏「因果關係」為表面藉口，推卸「人禍」之另外肇事因素。因此，本文認為值得深入探究。本文首先檢視國家所應承擔之責任，國家對人民應負有保護義務與責任，倘若因國家之行政不作為而致人民遭受損害，國家應負賠償之責；其次，探討行政不作為之違法性，對於違法性之認定及其判斷基準，本文認為應採「裁量權收縮論」，為了防止重大災害之發生或為保護重要之法益，特別係為了保護人民之生命、身體或健康免於受到危害，此時，行政機關所為之裁量應受到限縮；再者，公務員所為之違法行為，須以其於法律上負有作為義務為先決條件，倘若無作為義務之存在，表示其無違反作為義務。因此，無法成立行政不作為之國家賠償責任。惟公務員怠於執行職務時，雖該管機關公務員具有作為義務之存在，但人民並非因此享有國家賠償請求權，仍須具備主觀公權利為其要件，方能提起救濟。最後，本文列出具爭議性之實務案例，以「天然災害」與「行政機關應作為義務」為實務案例之區分。前者以「小林村」與「南沙魯村」等實務案例為主，後者則將「預防性封橋封路之義務」、「施予緊急救護之義務」、「道路邊坡養護管理之義務」、「地錨設施檢查之義務」等為類型劃分，以「梅姬颱風侵襲蘇花公路事件」、「蘭勢大橋斷橋事件」、「后豐大橋斷橋事件」、「張博崴山難事件」、「豐丘明隧道崩坍案」及「國道三號走山事件」等為主要介紹，整理實務與學者們對該實務案例之見解，並提出個人之淺見。 Since the J.Y. Interpretation No. 469 referred to the theory of Norm Protection from Germany and redefined the meaning of the inaction of the employees of the Government, the administrative and the courts have followed the interpretation and adopted the theory of “Ermessensschrumpfung” (discretion contraction) as the criteria to discern the issue of legality regarding damage caused by the negligence of the employees of the Government. However, if a legislation has authorized the employees of the Government with discretion power, whether the discretion power is exercised proper or not, there is no governmental tort arise from the Government employee’s inaction. Thus, the motivation of this research is to explore the related issues and cases of the state inaction and the liability. First, this thesis reviews the liabilities of the state. The state is obligated to protect it’s citizens under Constitution. Thus, the state is liable to compensate the damage caused by the negligence of civil servants. Second, it analyzes the illegality of the administrative inaction. In order to protect the citizens, including life, body and health, against destructive disasters, this thesis argues that the criteria to review the illegality of a state inaction should adopt the “Ermessensschrumpfung” theory which limits the discretion of administrative agencies. Third, the obligation to act under law must be viewed as a precondition as to review the unlawful conducts of the employees of the Government. If they are obligated to act, the damages should be made under State Compensation Act. Fourth, only if the citizens have an individual right at stake, could they file a lawsuit against the state. In the case of Hsiao-Lin Village compensation claim, the verdict applied the last phrase of Article 2, Paragraph 2 of the State Compensation Act, but it raised the threshold of the state compensation in relation to the damage caused by the negligence of the employees of the Government. The thesis urges that it was not proper to apply the criteria of “Ermessensreduzierung auf Null” in the case verdict since it overlooked two critical factors. One of the factors is the predictability of the rainfall and the other one is the possibility of evacuating the residents in advance. It is improper to shirk the responsibility of the state due to lack of causal relation. This thesis discusses several controversial cases regarding the judgements under State Compensation Act and analyzes the argument from scholarly and practical sides. In the end, this thesis proposes the writer’s view with respect to the development of state liability in Taiwan.
显示于类别:	[法律學系暨法律學研究所] 博碩士論文

文件中的档案:

档案	描述	大小	格式	浏览次数
index.html		0Kb	HTML	79	检视/开启

检视Licence

在CCUR中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.

数据加载中.....