行政法院對都市更新計畫核定後爭議之審查──永春都更案判決的標準及其問題

The Judicial Review byAdministrative Courts onIssues After the Approval ofUrban Renewal Plan–The Review Standards and Its Problems inCourt Decision on Yongchun Case

都市更新事業計畫經主管機關核定後，後續的訴訟，主要集中在「問題1：反對都更戶的抵死不從拆遷問題」，以及後續權利變換計畫中的各個具體爭議，包括「問題2：房地選配」、「問題3：共同負擔費用編列」「問題4：權利價值估算」等問題。本文將以永春都更案作為主軸，依序討論上述這四個問題的產生背景，以及行政法院的審查態度。本文認為，行政法院對共同負擔費用編列所要求的附理由說明義務，審查標準過於嚴格，是錯誤繼受美國法院環評案件的審查標準。本文認為，「問題3：共同負擔費用編列」和「問題4：權利價值估算」，屬於同樣的問題屬性，法律對爭議處理的程序應為相同的設計，行政法院對爭議問題的審查也應為相同的審查態度。

After the approval of urban renewal business plan, the litigations afterwardfocus on four type of issues. First issue is that disagreed ownerskeep resistance against demolition and removing, the other three issues areproblems come from the detail and implementation of the rights transformationplans, which are: issue 2: allocating land and buildings, issue 3:compilation of common shared expenditures, and issue 4: evaluation ofrights values. I want use the case of Yongchun urban renewal as a lead, tointroduce the backgrounds of these four issue in order, and discuss the reviewattitude on these four issues from administrative courts. Administrativecourts mandate the committee of urban renewal offer reason aboutcompilation of common shared expenditures after the Yongchun case. Thisreview standard is too strict, I will explain that the standard is borrowed from the environmental-impact-assessment cases in Taiwan, which weretransplanted from the U.S. environmental-impact-assessment cases, butthis transplantation is wrong. I will propose that “issue 3: compilation ofcommon shared expenditures” and “issue 4: evaluation of rights values”have the same characteristics, and they should be deal with in the sameprocedure in laws. For the same reasons, the review attitude on these twoissues by administrative courts should be the same.