規約另定區分所有權人會議召集人的效力

The Effect of the Bylaws about the Convener of Unit Owner Assembly

規約另定區分所有權人會議召集人的效力，事關會議的合法召集，是理論與實務上的重要議題。本文先探討對區分所有權人會議召集人規定應有的理解，再評釋規約另定區分所有權人會議召集人的行政與司法實務見解。本研究著重規範目的與相關人的利益衡量，並酌採比較法與成本效益分析。
規約就區分所有權人會議召集人常見的另有規定內容有三：一、由管理委員會的主任委員（無論是否為區分所有權人）為召集人；二、由前屆管理委員會的主任委員為召集人；三、由區分所有權人互推1人為召集人。本文認為，基於區分所有權人團體的自主決定權，上開規約規定均有效。然而，如實際上未產生規約規定的召集人，或該召集人未召集會議，本條例第25條第3項規定的召集人，應有召集會議的義務。

The effect of the bylaws concerning the convener of unit owner assembly is an important issue in theory and practice because it relates to whether the unit owner assembly convened legitimately. This paper first explores the provisions of the convener of unit owner assembly with due understanding. This paper further reviews the administrative and judicial viewpoints on the effect of the bylaws regarding the convener of unit owner assembly. The purposes of the related provisions and interests of the concerned parties are emphasized. Comparative law and cost-benefit analyses are adopted partially in this study.
The content of the bylaws in regard to the convener of unit owner assembly is usually as follows: 1. The convener shall be the chairperson of the management committee (whether he is a unit owner). 2. The convener shall be former chairperson of the management committee. 3. The unit owners shall elect among them a person to be the convener. This paper holds that the said provisions stipulated in the bylaws are valid based on autonomy of the unit owners’group. However, if no convener has been elected, or the convener fail to convene the meeting, the convener stipulated in Article 25 of this Act is required to convene.