「乳酪工坊案」(Ulpianus D. 8,5, 8, 5)中的羅馬法相鄰關係規範模式及其當代影響

本文藉由分析羅馬法學家Ulpianus的「乳酪工坊案」，呈現羅馬法相鄰關係規範模式，探究其對1900年德國民法與我國民法的影響。公元前1世紀至公元3世紀中葉的羅馬法學家以「地役權－相鄰關係」和「確認役權之訴－妨害除去之訴」這兩組對立概念為基礎，開展了相鄰關係的規範框架。關於特定土地使用方式是否須以設定地役權為前提之問題，二世紀法學家Pomponius引入「重大性」判斷標準，影響深遠。此外，基於羅馬法程式訴訟體制中的金錢敗訴判決原則，妨害除去訴訟能為當事人提供獲得金錢補償之可能。19世紀潘德克頓法學的羅馬法繼受，確立了現行德國民法的體系架構與素材。耶林的利益思想和法學建構論則為羅馬法傳統下的相鄰關係規範提供了新觀點，具體影響了德國民法第906條的立法，尤其是該條規定中的「地方習慣」標準。1880年以降的德國帝國法院實務，在相鄰關係規範發展過程中具有關鍵地位，確立了受妨害土地所有人的犧牲補償請求權。這個發展歷程雖係獨立於羅馬法傳統，卻清楚呈現出，關於逾越重大性程度的不可量物侵入，即使民法上僅以禁止侵入為唯一法律效果，在具體相鄰關係案件中，仍可能存在以金錢補償請求權取代妨害除去請求權的需求，而這正好是古典羅馬法相鄰關係規範模式中的核心內涵之一，且此一規範模式也與當代法律經濟分析學說相互呼應。從羅馬法到德國民法的發展，有助於理解我國民法第793條的歷史脈絡並檢視其規範功能。

This article discusses the conception of Roman neighbor law by analyzing Ulpian’s ''casiaria'' case and demonstrates its influence on the German BGB of 1900 as well as the Taiwanese Civil Code. Roman jurists between 1st century BCE and 3rd century CE developed the framework of neighbor law on the foundation of two pairs of concepts: ''servitudes - neighbor law'' and ''actio confessoria - actio negatoria''. Concerning the issue of whether a certain use of land requires the creation of a servitude, Pomponius introduced the criterion of ''significance'', which had a profound impact. Furthermore, the principle of condemnatio pecuniaria provided the possibility of obtaining compensation for the plaintiff of an actio negatoria. The adoption of Roman law by the 19th-century Pandectist jurisprudence established the framework and substance of the current German Civil Code. The doctrine of interests and the theory of legal construction of Jhering offered new perspectives for neighbor law and had great influence on the legislation of§906 BGB, especially on the criterion of ''local custom''. Judgements of the Reichsgericht after 1880 played a crucial role in the development of neighbor law by establishing the right of the impaired party to compensation. Although this development was independent of the Roman law tradition, it clearly demonstrates that, concerning immissions beyond the insignificant extent, there might be a need for granting the impaired party a claim for compensation instead of a claim for the removal of immissions in specific cases, even when the right to the removal of immissions is the only remedy provided in the Civil Code. This is precisely one of the main characters of the classical Roman neighbor law, which also resonates with contemporary economic analysis of law. The development from Roman law to modern German BGB is illuminating for understanding the historical context and examining the function of Article 793 of Taiwanese Civil Code.