| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立高雄大學 === 法律學系碩士班 === 107 === Land is the most basic element for human survival. The distribution and utilization of land being appropriate or not greatly influence the national development and people's life of a country. A probe deeply into the most closely related projects between modern society and land should be limited to the actual land-use right holders, for example, land lessees or superficies owners. They are usually the weak in society during Taiwan’s economic development process. And these factors had been interwoven into complex social and economic activities. However, the concept of “there is soil, there is wealth” is generally deeply rooted in the hearts of the people. The land is not only limited by quantity, but also very much with economic exclusivity due to being unmovable. Promoting the use of common objects for their purposes of public interest, and dramatically resolving the unreasonableness of the unanimity rule of the long-term blamed Article 819 in Civil Code, can reduce the limitation factors of the use of land due to family history and affective reasons. Although Majority rule maintains the basic order of a democratic society, and allow the majority to eliminate the arbitrariness of the minority, the Constitution guarantees people's basic social and economic rights, and property rights are one of the basic rights protected by the Constitution. On the other hand, Majority rule also restricts the rights and interests of a small number of co-owners. It stands for the obligations that must be endured for public welfare. The benefit of both majority and minority should be measured by social responsibility according to law, and to obtain reasonableness at both ends of Libra. This article is about the study on the controversy related to Land Act. Article 34-1.
The first chapter of this thesis is set as an introduction including a brief explanation of individual research motivation, the research scope, and research methods of this thesis. In the second chapter, the legislative objectives and legislative evolution of Article 34-1 of the Land Act, and a brief and concise concept related to this study will be gradually explained. The third chapter contains the first item of Article 34 of the Land Act, explaining and analyzing the relevant disputes concerning the disposal of shared land. The definitions of the first paragraph of this law are different in the realms of practice and doctrine that there are doubts about its application, and lack in assuring the value of property rights. The fourth chapter is a special chapter to deal with controversies generated by the right of first refusal of provision in item 4 of Article 34 of the Land Act, and to explain the contents of the provisions of the article, as well as the current judicial practice, and opinion about the interpretative letters or theories issued by the administrative organizations. There is a summary in the fifth chapter to sum up the opinions of this article on relevant disputes, and a proposal of the future amendments to Article 34 of the Land Act, with a view to reducing the disturbance of the common real estate disposal.
|
|---|
