| 姓名 | 林曉男(Shie-Nan Lin) | 電子郵件信箱 | s9511615@cyut.edu.tw | |
| 畢業系所 | 營建工程系碩士班(Department and Graduate Institute of Constrction Engineering) | |||
| 畢業學位 | 碩士(Master) | 畢業時期 | 96學年第2學期 | |
| 論文名稱(中) | 工程總價承攬契約漏項爭議之研究 | |||
| 論文名稱(英) | A Study on the Dispute of the Entry Omission in the Lump-Sum Contracts | |||
| 檔案 |
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。 |
論文使用權限 | 校內外均一年後公開 | |
| 論文語文/頁數 | 中文/175 | |||
| 摘要(中) |
漏項係指總價承攬契約中，圖說或規範上記載之工程項目，遺漏於工程價目表上，導致承攬商無法請求工程款之情形。然，實務上漏項爭議不單只侷限於圖說上有而工程價目表上漏列之工程項目；亦有圖說上未列之工程項目如假設工程之鷹架、模版等亦為完成工程項目之必要工作項目，此部分亦為常見之爭議。而工程實務上，卻以契約採購要項規定工程之個別項目實作數量增減達百分之十以上，其逾百分之十部分，得以變更設計增減契約價金；未達百分之十者，契約價金不予增減予以處理。然，漏項為一完整項目之遺漏，是否適用上述規定不無疑義。 漏項一詞目前並未有明確法律定義。本論文研究方法採資料收集、判讀及各學說與實務（行政解釋函、法院裁判）等質化文獻內容分析與研討，主要歸納分類實務上契約漏項爭議之型態，以利分析漏項真義。工程契約漏項爭議主因為契約中設計圖說、施工規範、工作項目表及單價分析表互有歧異所致。針對各種漏項型態之區分，論文歸納整理、分類，加以明確判斷該類型是否係屬漏項；並將「漏項」分為顯性及隱性二大類。並提出明確之判別漏項與否之定義－將現地施工之項目與工作價目表、單價分析表之項目作比較判斷，依工程實際施工項目為基準，若工程價目表或單價分析表漏列實際施工項目者，即為「漏項」；反之，則稱為「多項」。另，本論文並針對漏項爭議之問題擬定建議條文明定於合約內，以減少契約漏項爭議之產生。 |
|||
| 摘要(英) | The
omitted item means that the construction project described in
the drawings or specifications of the lump sum contract is
omitted in the price list, causing the contractor unable to
claim the project payment. However, the dispute over omitted
items is not simply limited to those projects existed in the
drawings but omitted in the price list and also include those
projects unlisted in the drawings such as the erection of
scaffolds and the formwork, which are necessary works for the
completion of constructions and are also common parts of
disputes. In practical cases, the Essential Requirements for
Procurement Contracts provide that the increase or decrease of
the practical quantity for individual project shall be more than
10%. For the excess over 10%, it is necessary to modify the
design and to increase or decrease the contract price. For the
deficiency less than 10%, it is unnecessary to handle such
increases or decrease of contract prices. However, it is still
doubtful if the omitted item, which is an omission of the whole
project, is applicable to such provisions. There is not any explicitly legal definition for the term of omitted items now. With such qualitative research methods as data collections, data readings & interpretations and various theories & practices (the letter of administrative interpretation and the court judgment), this paper analyzes and studies these documentary contents to conclude and classify the types of practical contract disputes over omitted items in favor of analyzing the correct definition of omitted items. The main reason for the dispute over the omitted item in the construction contract is mutual differences among the design drawing, the construction specification, the list of work item lists and the analysis report of unit prices in the contract. For the discrimination among the types of various omitted items, this paper makes a conclusion and classification to definitely decide if such types are parts of omitted items. Besides, this paper divides the “omitted item” into two categories: dominant and recessive, and also provides clear definition for deciding the omitted item. To compare the on-site work items with those items listed in the work price list and the analysis report of unit prices for decision, if the work price list or the unit prices analysis is omitted by comparing with the it is called “omitted item”, contranly it will be the “surplus item”. In addition, for the problem of disputes over omitted-items, this paper suggests to make an explicit article in the contract to reduce the contract dispute over omitted items. |
|||
| 關鍵字(中) |
|
關鍵字(英) |
|
|
| 口試委員 |
|
|||
| 口試日期 | 2008-07-29 | 繳交日期 | 2008-08-21 | |