dc.contributor | 法律系 | |
dc.creator (作者) | 吳瑾瑜 | zh_TW |
dc.date (日期) | 2015 | |
dc.date.accessioned | 17-May-2017 15:10:06 (UTC+8) | - |
dc.date.available | 17-May-2017 15:10:06 (UTC+8) | - |
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 17-May-2017 15:10:06 (UTC+8) | - |
dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/109669 | - |
dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 分管約定,倘係於98年7月23日民法第八百二十條第一項修正施行前業已成立、且未定有分管期限者,最高法院或臺灣高等法院或臺北地方法院之態度似乎皆為,共有人不能依民法第八百二十條第一項新規定之多數決方式予以終止。縱依98年7月23日施行之修正後民法第八百二十條,倘欲終止全體共有人合意之分管契約,乃變更管理,須經共有人全體同意,始得為之。總結來說,就分管約定之終止,各審級法院之立場一仍舊貫,完全不受第八百二十條第一項新修正規定之影響。 | |
dc.description.abstract (摘要) | According to the in 2009 revised Article 820 of the Civil Code : “Unless otherwise provided by a covenant, the management of the thing held in indivision, the consent of more than half of the Co-owners whose holding of ownership is more than half of the total share shall be required. But if the holding of ownership is more than two thirds, the numbers of consenting co-owners need not be taken into account.” The amendment adopt majority rule while abolishing the absolute unanimity. This research aims at investigating if the new enacted majority rule applies to termination of Separate-Management Contrac.The Analysis of the judgments pronounced by the Supreme Court since 2009shows however the stance of the Supreme Court on termination of Separate-Management Contract insists on absolute unanimity. The legal situation regarding termination of Separate-Management Contract still remains unchanged. | |
dc.format.extent | 366742 bytes | - |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
dc.relation (關聯) | MOST 103-2410-H-004-163 | |
dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 分管契約(約定); 分管契約(約定)之終止; 專用權約定; 民法第八百二十條第一項; 公寓大廈共用部分 | |
dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Article 820 of the Civil Code; Covenant to manage the thing held in Indivision; Separate-Management Contract; Termination of Separate-Management Contract; Majority Rule; Absolute Unanimity | |
dc.title (題名) | 如何終止分管契約之研究─以最高法院裁判為中心 | zh_TW |
dc.type (資料類型) | report | |