:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:徵收之憲法拘束:以「私用徵收」的違憲審查為中心
書刊名:國立臺灣大學法學論叢
作者:陳仲嶙 引用關係
作者(外文):Chen, Chung-lin
出版日期:2011
卷期:40:3
頁次:頁1029-1088
主題關鍵詞:徵收財產權違憲審查審查標準公共使用條款凱洛案TakingEminent domainCondemnationProperty rightsJudicial reviewStandard of reviewPublic use clauseKelo v. City of New London
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(5) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:3
  • 共同引用共同引用:1931
  • 點閱點閱:125
在我國,法律賦予政府極廣泛的徵收權力,其中不乏私用徵收之授權,也就是允許為提供私人特別使用-而非提供公眾使用-所進行之徵收。這些法律過去極少遭受質疑,政府泛濫的徵收也往往高舉依法行政之旗幟。本文之目的,即在探討徵收之發動應受如何的憲法拘束,尤其聚焦於私用徵收應觸發何種違憲審查標準之議題。 從效率、公平性以及政治程序健全性三個面向之論述出發,本文主張,司法者對於私用徵收之法律與行政決定應嚴格地加以檢視。依此見解,則我國目前授權為設置園區進行徵收之立法,恐怕無法通過違憲審查;近期幾項遭受抗爭之徵收決定,也在合法性上問題重重。
In Taiwan, laws grant governments extensive powers of eminent domain, including, in many circumstances, the power to take property for the purpose of conveying it to a private person. Those laws were rarely questioned, and governments often abuse the power while claiming that their actions are based on law. The purpose of this article is to investigate the constitutional constraint on the exercise of eminent domain. Particularly, the article will focus on the issue what standard of judicial review should apply to taking property for private use. Based on the analysis from the perspectives of efficiency, fairness, and political process failure, this article argues that state actions that allow governments to take property for private use should trigger strict scrutiny. It follows that the current statutes that authorize governments to take property for the purpose of establishing various "industrial parks" are likely unconstitutional and many recent administrative decisions of eminent domain are highly problematic in terms of legality.
期刊論文
1.法治斌(19810600)。憲法保障人民財產權與其他權利之標準。政大法學評論,23,1-26。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.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
3.廖元豪(20080300)。高深莫測,抑或亂中有序?--論現任大法官在基本權利案件中的「審查基準」。中研院法學期刊,2,211-274。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.王榆評(20000400)。財產權之保障與限制--以耕地三七五減租條例為中心。憲政時代,25(4),141-163。  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.王文宇(20010100)。從財產權保障與政府權責論震災重建。國立臺灣大學法學論叢,30(1),45-72。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.黃昭元(20040500)。憲法權利限制的司法審查標準:美國類型化多元標準模式的比較分析。國立臺灣大學法學論叢,33(3),45-148。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.Calabresi, Guido、Melamed, A. Douglas(1972)。Property Rules, Liability Rules, and Inalienability: One View of the Cathedral。Harvard Law Review,85(6),1089-1128。  new window
9.蔡維音(2006)。財產權之保護內涵與釋學結構。成大法學,11,1-74。new window  延伸查詢new window
10.蔡懷卿(2004)。美國之土地使用法管制以及其憲法許可界限。玄奘法律 學報,2,197-279。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.Ely, J. W. Jr.(2009)。Post-Kelo reform:Is the glass half full or half empty。Supreme Court Economic Review,17,127-150。  new window
12.Epstein, R. A.(2005)。Kelo:An american original。Green Bag 2d,8,355-361。  new window
13.Epstein, R. A.(2009)。Public use in a post-Kelo world。Supreme Court Economic Review,17,151-171。  new window
14.Hopperton, R. J.(1997)。Standards of judicial review in Supreme Court land use opinions:A taxonomy, and a synthesis。Washington University Journal of Urban and Contemporary Law,51,1-188。  new window
15.Jones, S. J.(2000)。Trumping eminent domain law:An argument for strict scrutiny analysis under the public use requirement of the Fifth Amendment。Syracuse Law Review,50,285-314。  new window
16.Wang, Yu-Ping(2000)。The protection and restriction of the right of property from the perspectives oi the Law on the Reduction of Tillable-Land-Rent to 37.5%。The Constitutional Review,25(4),141-163。  new window
17.Burkard, K. M.(2005)。No more government theft of property! A call to return to a heightened standard of review after the United States Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London。Hamline Journal Public Law & Policy,27,115-162。  new window
18.Somin, Ilya(2007)。Controlling the grasping hand:Economic development takings after Kelo。Supreme Court Economic Review,15,183-271。  new window
19.Somin, I.(2009)。The limits of backlash:Assessing the political response to Kelo。Minnesota Law Review,93(6),2100-2178。  new window
20.Brnce Liao, Yuan-Hao(2008)。Fathomlessness or ordered chaos? Reviewing the Grand Justices’ “standard of review” in individual rights cases。Academia Sinica Law Journal,2,211-274。  new window
21.Lefcoe, G.(2008)。After Kelo, curbing opportunistic TIF-driven economic development:Forgoing ineffectual blight tests; empowering property owners and school districts。Tulane Law Review,83,45-110。  new window
22.McFarlane, A. G.(2009)。Rebuilding the public-private city:Regulatory taking's anti-subordination insights for eminent domain and redevelopment。Indiana Law Review,42(1),97-163。  new window
23.Posner, R. A.(2005)。Forward:A political court。Harvard Law Review,119(1),31-102。  new window
會議論文
1.王必芳(2010)。法國行政法上的公益概念:兼評我國行政法院有關公益之見解。台北。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.陳玉峰(2006)。區段徵收補償法制之研究(碩士論文)。國立政治大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.張嘉紋(2001)。我國土地徵收法制之探討--以行政法院裁判為中心(碩士論文)。國立政治大學。  延伸查詢new window
3.陳育峰(2006)。工業區管理制度與滿意度之研究(碩士論文)。國立政治大學。  延伸查詢new window
4.周信燉(2005)。由權力觀點審視台灣土地徵收制度之研究。國立政治大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Kaplin, William A.(1992)。The concepts and methods of constitutional law。Durham, N. C.:Carolina Academic Press。  new window
2.Nowak, John E.、Rotunda, Ronald D.(2000)。Constitutional Law。St. Paul, MN:West。  new window
3.Komesar, Neil K.(2001)。Law's Limits: the Rule of Law and the Supply and Demand of Rights。Cambridge University Press。  new window
4.陳新民(2008)。憲法學釋論。三民書局。  延伸查詢new window
5.Komesar, Neil K.(1994)。Imperfect alternatives: Choosing institutions in law, economics, and public policy。Chicago, Illinois:The University of Chicago Press。  new window
6.李惠宗(200809)。行政法要義。臺北:元照出版有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
7.Singer, Joseph William(2006)。Property Law: Rules, Policies and Practices。New York:aspen。  new window
8.Posner, Richard A.(1998)。Economic Analysis of Law。New York, NY:Aspen。  new window
9.法治斌、董保城(2006)。憲法新論。元照。  延伸查詢new window
10.陳立夫(2007)。土地法研究。新學林。  延伸查詢new window
11.陳新民(2002)。憲法基本權利之基本理論。元照出版有限公司。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.林子儀(19990000)。言論自由與新聞自由。臺北:元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
13.吳庚(2007)。行政法之理論與實用。三民書局。new window  延伸查詢new window
14.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
15.Ely, John Hart(1980)。Democracy and Distrust: A Theory of Judicial Review。Harvard University Press。  new window
16.Wu, Geng(2007)。Administrative law in theory and practice。Taipei。  new window
17.Lee, Hwai-Tzong(2008)。Administrative law。Taipei。  new window
18.Lin, Tzu-Yi(1999)。Freedom of speech and freedom of the press。Taipei。  new window
19.Lin, Tzu-Yi(2002)。Introduction to the freedom of speech。Examining Taiwan's Constitution。Taipei。  new window
20.Fa, Jyh-Pin、Dung, Bau-Tscheng(2006)。Constitutional law。Taipei。  new window
21.Chen, Li-Fu(2007)。Land use law。Taipei。  new window
22.Lin, Tzu-Yi、Yeh, Jiunn-Rong、Hwang, Jau-Yuan、Chang, Wen-Chen(2008)。Constitutional law:Separation of powers。Taipei。  new window
23.Chen, Shin-Mm(2002)。The theory of constitutional rights, vol. I。Taipei。  new window
24.Chen, Shin-Mm(2008)。Commentaries on constitutional law。Taipei。  new window
25.Dennis Tang, Te-Chung(2009)。Constructing coherent standards of constitutional review:On the idea of “hierarchical proportionality principle”。Constitutional interpretation:Theory and practice, vol. 6 part II。Taipei。  new window
26.Fisher, L.、Hamger, K. J.(2009)。American constitutional law。NC。  new window
27.Nadler, J.、Diamond S. S.、Patton M. M.(200B)。Government takings of private property:Kelo and the perfect storm。Public opinion and constitutional controversy。New York。  new window
28.Lee, Chien-Liang(2006)。Compensation。Administration law II.。Taipei。  new window
29.Ely, J. W. Jr.(1992)。The guardian of every other right:A constitutional history of property rights。New York。  new window
其他
1.The British Library(2007)。About Us。  new window
2.Rural Unions of Dapu,Erchongpu,Wanbao,Hsiangszuliao(2010)。The joint declaration of farmers self-salvation:when one is suffering, everyone comes to help!,http://e-info.org.tw/node/56851, 20100724。  new window
3.Anti-CTSP Passionate Youths Union(2009)。No CTSP! Youths, stand out for the protest in Oct. 31,http://antictsp.wordpress.com/?s=%E5%8F%8D%E4%B8%AD%E7%A7%, 20091026。  new window
4.反中科熱血青年聯盟(2010)。相思寮反徵收普查工作隊招募,http://antictsp.wordpress.com/2010/01/04/%e6%96%b0%e7%9b%b8%e6%80%9d%e5%af%ae%e5%8f%8d%e5%be%b5%e6%94%b6%e6%99%ae%e6%9f%a5%e5%b7%a5%e4%bd%9c%e9%9a%8a%e6%8b%9b%e5%8b%, 20100104。  new window
5.Anti-CTSP Passionate Youths Union(2010)。The Hsiangszuliao anti-condemnation survey working group now recruiting,http://antictsp.wordpress.com/2010/01/04/%e6%96%b0%e7%9b%b8%e6%80%9d%e5%af%ae%e5%8f%8d%e5%be%b5%e6%94%b6%e6%99%ae%e6%9f%a5%e5%b7%a5%e4%bd%9c%e9%9a%8a%e6%8b%9b%e5%8b%9f/, 20100104。  new window
6.大埔,二重捕,灣寶,相思寮自救會(2010)。農民自救聯合宣言:一方有難 $a三方來救!,http://e-info.org.tw/node/56851, 20100724。  延伸查詢new window
7.反中科熱血青年聯盟(2009)。反中科!熱血青年站出來10/30北上抗議,http://antictsp.wordpress.com/?s=%E5%8F%8D%E4%B8%AD%E7%A7%, 20091026。  延伸查詢new window
8.台灣人權促進會(2009)。2009十大人權新聞兩公約的第一份診斷書,http://www.tahr.org.tw/index.php/article/2009/12/07/752, 20091207。  延伸查詢new window
9.Taiwan Association for Human Rights(2009)。2009 top ten human rights news The first diagnosis of the two conventions,http://www.tahr.org.tw/index.php/article/2009/12/07/752, 20091207。  new window
10.朱淑娟(2010)。請把人民財產當回事,http://e-info.org.tw/node/56783, 20100724。  延伸查詢new window
11.朱淑娟(2009)。營建署區域計畫通過中科四期案學者:民主程序嚴重倒退,http://e-info.org.tw/node/49268, 20091113。  延伸查詢new window
12.Chu, Shu-Chuan(2009)。The project of the Central Taiwan Science Park Phase 4 approved in the zoning plan of the Construction and Planning Agency - Scholars:Democracy in retreat,http://e-info.org.tw/node/49268, 20091113。  new window
13.朱淑娟(2010)。「後龍科技圜區」區委會再審苗縣府開發理由禁不起檢驗,http://e-info.org.tw/node/56141, 20100724。  延伸查詢new window
14.Chu, Shu-Chuan(2010)。The Zoning Committee of 'Hou Lung Technology Parkf met again - The reasons of Miaoli County for development cannot withstand inspection,http://e-info.org.tw/node/56141, 20100724。  new window
15.Chu, Shu-Chuan(2010)。Please taking people's property seriously,http://e-info.org.tw/node/56783, 20100724。  new window
16.呂苡榕(2010)。不當土地徵收下的開發難民遍佈全台,http://e-info.org.tw/node/51286, 20100724。  延伸查詢new window
17.Hsu, Shih-Jung,http://sjhsu51545.blogspot.com, 20100706。  new window
18.陳佳珣(2010)。科技產業搶我家,http://e-info.org.tw/node/55289, 20100419。  延伸查詢new window
19.李丁讃(2010)。徵地浮濫是衝突的根本原因。  延伸查詢new window
20.Chan, Shun-kuei et al.(2010)。Land Condemnation Act (NGO version),http://www.taiwanruralfront.org/node/209, 20101118。  new window
21.廖靜蕙(2010)。閒置工業區不用苗栗縣府就是要徵收灣寶良田,http://e-info.org.tw/node/55450, 20100724。  延伸查詢new window
22.Liao, Ching-Hui(2010)。Keeping industrial parks unused - Miaoli County is determined to take Wanbao's fine farmland,http://e-info.org.tw/node/55450, 21010724。  new window
23.廖靜蕙(2010)。凱道守夜藝院學生粉筆插秧、縫百納被祈福,littp://e-info.org.tw/node/57448, 20101025。  延伸查詢new window
24.Liao, Ching-Hui(2010)。Night watch at Kategalan Boulevard -Art students drawing rice seedlings and sewing patched quilts,http://e-info.org.tw/node/57448, 20101025。  new window
25.顧美芬(2009)。新聞回顧:中科四期二林園區環評不平,http://e-info.org.tw/node/49444, 20091120。  延伸查詢new window
26.Gu, Mei-Fen(2009)。News review:The environmental impact assessment of the Erh-lin division of the Central Taiwan Science Park Phase 4 was injustice,http://e-info.org.tw/node/49444, 20091120。  new window
27.卓馨怡(2010)。哭泣的韭菜花,http://e-info.org.tw/node/56654, 20100724。  延伸查詢new window
28.林燕如(2010)。點土成金,http://e-info.org.tw/node/56190, 20100724。  new window
29.Lin, Yen-Ju(2010)。Turning land into gold,http://e-info.org., 21010724。  new window
30.徐世榮(2010)。終止浮濫的土地徵收。  延伸查詢new window
31.Hsu, Shih-Jung(2010)。Stoping eminent domain abuse。  new window
32.Chen, Chia-Hsun(2010)。Technology industry snatches my home,http://e-info.org.tw/node/55289, 20100419。  new window
33.陳怡文(2010)。飄浪之歌:二林相思寮與ー鄰農場訪談記,http://e-info.org..tw/node/56708, 20100724。  延伸查詢new window
34.Chen, Yi-Wen(2010)。The song of tramps:Interviews with Erlin Hsiangszuliao and Neighborhood 1 Farm,http://e-info.org.tw/node/56708, 20100724。  new window
35.詹順貴等(2010)。土地徵收條例修正草案【民間版】,http://www.taiwanruralfront.org/node/209, 20101118。  延伸查詢new window
36.Nelson, K.(2009)。Conn. land taken from homeowners still undeveloped. Associated Press.,http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9AU92VG0&show_article=l, 20110127。  new window
37.Lu, Yi-Jung(2010)。The refugees under injustice eminent domain all over Taiwan,http://e-info.org.tw/node/51286, 20100724。  new window
38.Li, Ting-Tsan(2010)。Eminent domain abuse is the underlying cause of the conflict。  new window
39.Cho, Hsin-Yi(2010)。Ciying leek flowers,http://e-info.org.tw/node/56654, 20100724。  new window
40.Calabresi, G.,Melamed, A. D.(n.d.)。50 state report card,http://www.castiecoalition.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=57&Itemid=113, 20100611。  new window
41.Calabresi, G.,Melamed, A. D.(n.d.)。Model language for state statutes limiting eminent domain abuse,http://www.castlecoalition.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=310&Itemid=117, 20100614。  new window
圖書論文
1.湯德宗(2009)。違憲審查基準體系建構初探:「階層式比例原則」構想。憲法解釋之理論與實務。中央研究院法律學研究所籌備處。  延伸查詢new window
2.李建良(2006)。損失補償。行政法。元照。  延伸查詢new window
3.林子儀(20020000)。言論自由導論。臺灣憲法之縱剖橫切。元照。new window  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
 
QR Code
QRCODE