:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
釋字第579號解釋揭示,土地徵收補償應遵守補償與損失相當原則。然而,該號解釋與其後之大法官解釋,並未闡明何謂損失,或一般被徵收人所獲得之補償是否與之相當。本文主張,被徵收人之損失至少是其經濟價值(即公平市價加主觀價值)。實證研究顯示,2000年至2009年間,臺灣多數被徵收人所獲得之補償,低於一般正常交易價格,其可能又低於公平市價。無論以釋字第652號解釋葉百修大法官之部分協同意見書所闡釋之相當原則為規範依據,或以經濟效率作為判斷標準,本文都得出至少須依公平市價具體化補償與損失相當原則之結論。土地徵收條例第30條可解釋為合憲,但眾多核給不足公平市價補償之行政處分則違憲。立法院應修法明確規定徵收補償數額不得低於一般正常交易價格,且一般正常交易價格應儘速逼近公平市價;長期而言,更應該廢除公告土地現值制度,落實以公平市價課稅與補償。
This article argues that the text in Taiwan's Constitution does not provide a clear guidance as to how much condemnation compensation should be paid. The Principle of Parity Between Compensation and Loss, set forth by Justices of the Constitutional Court in Interpretation No. 579, therefore, should be the compensation standard for land condemnation. My empirical study reveals that about 52% of the condemnation compensations (determined ex ante) between 2000 and 2009 were below the normal transaction price, posing the question whether the compensation practice fell short of the constitutional parity principle. This article argues that the current compensation regime violates the constitutional parity principle for two reasons. First, the dispersed distribution of condemnees' received compensations relative to their properties' normal transaction prices makes it difficult to justify all compensations as non-violative of the constitutional parity principle. Second, the Honorable Justice Pai-Hsiu Yeh's concurring opinion in J.Y. Interpretation No. 652 makes a case for fair market value as the bottom line for condemnation compensation, and most compensation paid has been below fair market value in the first decade in the twenty-first century. This article further argues that the legislature should as soon as possible revise the unconstitutional condemnation compensation regime, with efficiency in mind (efficiency also demands at least fair market value compensation). To be more specific, the Legislative Yuan should clarify its intention by amending Article 30 of the Land Condemnation Act and explicitly require that takings compensation be not less than ”normal transaction price” and that normal transaction price approximate fair market value. In the long run, when the Announced Current Land Value approximates fair market value, the Legislative Yuan should abolish the Announced Current Land Value regime altogether, and property taxes and takings compensation should be assessed according to fair market value.
期刊論文
1.蘇永欽(20001000)。立法裁量與司法審查。憲政時代,26(2),122-156。  延伸查詢new window
2.張景森(19921100)。虛構的革命:國民黨土地改革政策的形成與轉化(1905-1989)。臺灣社會研究,13,161-194。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.蔡吉源(20011100)。臺灣土地課稅制度--問題、影響與改革。臺灣土地研究,3,37-82。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.陳奉瑤(20030700)。公告土地現值與市場交易價格關係之研究。土地經濟年刊,14,1-24。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.蘇永欽(19981200)。財產權的保障與大法官解釋。憲政時代,24(3),19-64。  延伸查詢new window
6.蔡永利(1994)。應用統計估計模型辦理土地現值作業。現代地政,151,11-15。  延伸查詢new window
7.陳立夫(20080500)。析論我國土地徵收法制上之爭議問題。臺灣土地研究,11(1),1-35。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.陳新民(20090200)。徵收財產補償費的給付期限--司法院釋字第六五二號解釋的若干斟酌。軍法專刊,55(1),1-16。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.李建良(2008)。有徵收必有補償原則 : 釋字第六五ニ號。臺灣法學,118,171-174。  延伸查詢new window
10.現代地政雜誌。論公告土地現值調整偏低之後遺症。現代地政,144,1。  延伸查詢new window
11.許文昌(1988)。公告土地現值與土地市價差距之實證分析。台灣土地金融季刊,25(2),121-130。  延伸查詢new window
12.楊松齡(1992)。照價收買與地盡其利。人與地,99,9-13。  延伸查詢new window
13.蔡永利(1993)。應用統計估計模型辦理土地現值作業。現代地政,149,14-18。  延伸查詢new window
14.蔡永利(1993)。應用統計估計模型辦理土地現值作業。現代地政,150,12-16。  延伸查詢new window
15.陳立夫(2006)。照價收買之法律課題。臺灣本土法學,82,263-270。  延伸查詢new window
16.陳立夫(2005)。私有土地照價收買時之他項權利處理。月旦法學教室,34,38-39。  延伸查詢new window
17.李惠宗(1999)。從「宜蘭教養院徵收案」論公用徵收權限之歸屬及其行使之審査:評行政法院八十三年度判字第一五一五號判決。月旦法學雜誌,55,171-181。new window  延伸查詢new window
18.林英彥(1992)。土地增值稅案實際交易價格課徵問題探討。人與地,97,21-23。  延伸查詢new window
19.張永健(2010)。土地徵收條例第30條之徵收補償標準:綜論2000年後之最高行政法院相關判決。中硏院法學期刊,6,167-206。new window  延伸查詢new window
20.Bell, Abraham、Parchomovsky, Gideon(2007)。Taking Compensation Private。Stanford Law Review,59(4),871-906。  new window
21.Chang, Yun-chien(2009)。Empire Building and Fiscal Illusion? An Empirical Study of Government Official Behaviors in Takings。Journal of Empirical Legal Studies,6,541-584。  new window
22.Blume, Lawrence、Daniel L. Rubinfeld(1984)。Compensation for Takings : An Economic Analysis。California Law Review,72(4),569-628。  new window
23.Chang, Yun-chien(2010)。An Empirical Study of Compensation Paid in Eminent Domain Settlements: New York City 1990-2002。Journal of Legal Studies,39(1),201-244。  new window
24.Chang, Yun-chien(2011)。An Empirical Study of Court-Adjudicated Takings Compensation in New York City : 1990-2003。Journal of Empirical Legal Studies,8。  new window
25.Chang, Yun-chien(2012)。Self-Assessment of Takings Compensation : An Empirical Study。Journal of Law Economics & Organization,28(2),265-285。  new window
26.Eagle, Steven J.(1999)。Privatizing Urban Land Use Regulation : The Problem of Consent。George Mason Law Review,7,905-922。  new window
27.Merrill, Thomas W.(2002)。Incomplete Compensation for Takings Regulatory Expropriations in International Law。New York University Environmental Law Journal,11,110-135。  new window
28.Heller, Michael、Hills, Rick(2008)。Land Assembly Districts。Harvard Law Review,121(6),1465-1527。  new window
29.Fennell, Lee Anne(2004)。Taking Eminent Domain Apart。Michigan State Law Review,2004(4),957-1004。  new window
30.Krier, James E.、Christopher, Serkin(2004)。Public Ruses。Michigan State Law Review,2004,859-876。  new window
會議論文
1.張永健(2010)。徵收補償訴願 : 回顧與展望。  延伸查詢new window
研究報告
1.Chang, Yun-chien(2012)。Economic Value or Fair Market Value? The Efficient Standard of Physical Takings Compensation。  new window
學位論文
1.馮先勉(1988)。平均地權真詮:漲價歸公論(博士論文)。國立政治大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.陳瑩真(2004)。土地徵收補償中的估價問題(碩士論文)。國立臺北大學。  延伸查詢new window
3.黃淑惠(2000)。我國地價稅稅基評估之理論與實証分析--以台中市公告地價為分析對象(博士論文)。國立政治大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.葉百修(1988)。從財產權保障觀點論公用徵收制度(博士論文)。國立台灣大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.余保憲(2003)。我國平均地權土地政策執行:地價調整之探討(碩士論文)。國立中正大學。  延伸查詢new window
6.蘇文賢(2000)。應用大量估價法進行公告土地現值評估之研究(碩士論文)。國立政治大學。  延伸查詢new window
7.劉志清(2009)。政府土地徵收捕償之研究:從財產權的觀點。臺灣大學。  延伸查詢new window
8.陳乃榕(2007)。我國土地徵收地價補償行政救濟之研究。國立政治大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Posner, Richard A.(2007)。Economic Analysis of Law。New York, NY:ASPEN Publishers。  new window
2.Epstein, Richard A.(1985)。Takings: private Property and the Power of eminent Domain。  new window
3.Fischel, William A.(1995)。Regulatory Takings: Law, Economics and Politics。Harvard University Press。  new window
4.謝在全(2009)。民法物權論。台北:新學林。  延伸查詢new window
5.林紀東(1984)。中華民國憲法逐條釋義。臺北:三民書局股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
6.Kaplow, Louis、Shavell, Steven M.(2002)。Fairness versus Welfare。Cambridge, Mass:Harvard University Press。  new window
7.吳庚(200508)。行政法之理論與實用。臺北:三民書局。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.林子儀、葉俊榮、黃昭元、張文貞(2008)。憲法:權力分立。新學林出版股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
9.陳東升(19950000)。金權城市:地方派系、財團與臺北都會發展的社會學分析。臺北:巨流。new window  延伸查詢new window
10.尤重道(2001)。土地徵收實務。台北。  延伸查詢new window
11.李念祖(2006)。人權保障的内容。案例憲法。台北。  延伸查詢new window
12.卓輝華(2007)。不動產估價。台北。  延伸查詢new window
13.陳敏(2007)。政法總論。台北。  延伸查詢new window
14.陳新民(1990)。憲法基本權利之基本理論。台北。new window  延伸查詢new window
15.黃淑惠(2001)。掌握地價以貫徹平均地權之研究。台北。  延伸查詢new window
16.Dana, David、Merrill, Thomas W.(2002)。Property : Takings。New York:Foundation Press。  new window
17.Epstein, Richard Allen(1993)。Bargaining With the State。Princeton, NJ。  new window
18.Miceli, Thomas J.、Kathleen, Segerson(2007)。The Economics of Eminent Domain : Private Property, Public Use, and Just Compensation。Boston, MA.。  new window
19.李建良(2000)。損失補償。行政法。  延伸查詢new window
20.Evans, Alan W.(1999)。The Land Market and Government Intervention。Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics。New York, N.Y。  new window
21.Miceli, Thomas J.、Kathleen, Segerson(2000)。Takings。Encyclopedia of Law and Economics。Cheltenham, UK ; Northampton, MA。  new window
其他
1.國民大會秘書處(1946)。國民大會實錄,國民大會秘書處。  延伸查詢new window
2.李昌宏。依現行公告土地現值評價方法探討土地增值稅制之研究 : 以台中市為例,http://w3.tccg.gov.tw/intro/institution/plan/service/05doc/s_05_9101.doc, 20091008。  延伸查詢new window
3.李昌宏。地方政府稅收之研究 : 以台中市地價稅、土地增值稅之剖析,http://w3.tccg.gov.tw/intro/institution/plan/service/s_05.htm, 20091008。  延伸查詢new window
4.Independent Budget Office(2007)。Twenty-Five Years After S7000A : How Property Tax Burdens Have Shifted in New York City,http://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/propertytaxl20506.pdf。  new window
圖書論文
1.陳立夫(2005)。土地徵收與損失補償--我國土地徵收制度之若干重要課題。損失補償、行政程序法。元照。  延伸查詢new window
2.蔡宗珍(2004)。從憲法財產權之保障論既成道路與公用地役關係。憲法與國家。元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.陳立夫(2002)。我國土地徵收制度上若干問題之探討。新世紀經濟法制之建構與挑戰 : 廖義男教授六秩誕辰祝壽論文集。元照出版公司。  延伸查詢new window
4.陳明燦(2008)。私有公共設施保留地徵收之地價分析 : 兼論最高行政法院九六年判字第一九七○號判決。土地法專題研究。臺北:元照。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE