重要實務
【高雄-帝謙法律事務所/土地重要實務(52)】土地登記規則等就區分所有建物首次測量、登記之規定違憲?
2014.4.22 高雄律師-楊岡儒律師
發文單位： 司法院
解釋字號： 釋字第 600 號
解釋日期： 民國 94 年 07 月 22 日
解釋爭點：
土地登記規則等就區分所有建物首次測量、登記之規定違憲?
資料來源：
司法周刊 第 1246 期 1 版
司法院公報 第 47 卷 9 期 1-19 頁
考選周刊 第 1027 期 3 版
法令月刊 第 56 卷 8 期 91-93 頁
總統府公報 第 6651 號 12-45 頁
相關法條：
中華民國憲法 第 15、23 條 ( 36.01.01 )
民法 第 799、817 條 ( 91.06.26 )
土地法 第 36、37、47 條 ( 84.01.20 )
土地登記規則 第 75 條 ( 84.07.12 )
地籍測量實施規則 第 279 條 ( 87.02.11 )
解 釋 文：
依土地法所為之不動產物權登記具有公示力與公信力，登記之內容自須正確真實，以確保人民之財產權及維護交易之安全。不動產包括土地及建築物，性質上為不動產之區分所有建築物，因係數人區分一建築物而各有其一部，各所有人所享有之所有權，其關係密切而複雜，故就此等建築物辦理第一次所有權登記時，各該所有權客體之範圍必須客觀明確，方得據以登記，俾貫徹登記制度之上述意旨。內政部於中華民國八十四年七月十二日修正發布之土地登記規則與八十七年二月十一日修正發布之地籍測量實施規則分別係依土地法第三十七條第二項及第四十七條之授權所訂定。該登記規則第七十五條第一款乃係規定區分所有建築物共用部分之登記方法。上開實施規則第二百七十九條第一項之規定，旨在確定區分所有建築物之各區分所有權客體及其共用部分之權利範圍及位置，與建築物區分所有權移轉後之歸屬，以作為地政機關實施區分所有建築物第一次測量及登記之依據。是上開土地登記規則及地籍測量實施規則之規定，並未逾越土地法授權範圍，亦符合登記制度之首開意旨，為辦理區分所有建築物第一次測量、所有權登記程序所必要，且與民法第七百九十九條、第八百十七條第二項關於共用部分及其應有部分推定規定，各有不同之規範功能及意旨，難謂已增加法律所無之限制，與憲法第十五條財產權保障及第二十三條規定之法律保留原則及比例原則，尚無牴觸。
建築物 (包含區分所有建築物) 與土地同為法律上重要不動產之一種，關於其所有權之登記程序及其相關測量程序，涉及人民權利義務之重要事項者，諸如區分所有建築物區分所有人對於共用部分之認定、權屬之分配及應有部分之比例、就登記權利於當事人未能協議或發生爭議時之解決機制等，於土地法或其他相關法律未設明文，本諸憲法保障人民財產權之意旨，尚有未周，應檢討改進，以法律明確規定為宜。
理 由 書：
憲法第十五條規定，人民之財產權應予保障，旨在確保個人依財產之存續狀態行使其自由使用、收益及處分之權能（本院釋字第四００號解釋參照）。立法機關為確保人民財產權，並兼顧他人自由與公共利益之維護，得在符合憲法第二十三條比例原則之範圍內，制定法律或明確授權行政機關訂定法規命令，形成各種財產制度予以規範。不動產物權為憲法上所保障之財產權，民法第七百五十八條規定：「不動產物權，依法律行為而取得、設定、喪失及變更者，非經登記，不生效力。」同法第七百五十九條規定：「因繼承、強制執行、公用徵收或法院之判決，於登記前已取得不動產物權者，非經登記，不得處分其物權。」是不動產物權登記為不動產物權變動或處分之要件。土地法及其授權訂定之法令乃設有登記制度，以為辦理不動產物權登記之準據。依土地法令所設程序辦理上開不動產物權登記，足生不動產物權登記之公示力與公信力（土地法第四十三條、本院院字第一九五六號解釋參照），為確保個人自由使用、收益及處分不動產物權之重要制度，故登記須遵守嚴謹之程序，一經登記，其登記內容更須正確真實，俾與不動產上之真實權利關係完全一致，以保障人民之財產權及維護交易之安全。
不動產包含土地及建築物，性質上為不動產之區分所有建築物係數人區分一建築物而各有其一部，各區分所有人不僅對其專有部分享有所有權，並對該建築物專有部分以外之其他部分及其附屬物亦即共用部分，依一定之應有部分而共有之（民法第七百九十九條、公寓大廈管理條例第三條第二、三、四款參照），而共用部分不僅因建築物結構、形式或功用之不同致其位置、範圍有異，且又因是否為全部區分所有人所共有，而有全部區分所有人之共用部分及部分區分所有人之共用部分之別；建築物區分所有人對各該所有權之客體，於物理上相互連接，在使用上亦屬密不可分，各所有人所享有之專有部分及共用部分，彼此間之權利關係密切而錯綜複雜。於辦理區分所有建築物第一次所有權登記時，各該所有權客體即專有部分及共用部分之範圍及位置等自須客觀明確，地政機關方得據以登記，俾貫徹登記制度之上述意旨。
民法第七百九十九條、第八百十七條第二項關於共用部分及其應有部分雖設有推定之實體法原則規定，但為確保登記內容正確真實，關於規定不動產物權登記與測量程序之不動產物權登記程序法，就其登記程序自非不得為較具體之技術性規範。易言之，區分所有建築物之共用部分若尚未登記或有爭執者，區分所有人之權利固受民法上開規定之保障，然若辦理登記時，為求登記權利內容之詳實，則仍應依不動產物權登記程序法所設之登記程序為之。內政部八十四年七月十二日修正發布之土地登記規則與八十七年二月十一日修正發布之地籍測量實施規則係分別依當時之土地法第三十七條第二項及第四十七條之授權所訂定。上開實施規則第二百七十九條第一項規定：「申請建物第一次測量，應填具申請書，檢附建物使用執照、竣工平面圖及其影本，其有下列情形之一者，並應依各該規定檢附文件正本及其影本：一、區分所有建物，依其使用執照無法認定申請人之權利範圍及位置者，應檢具全體起造人分配協議書（第一款）。二、申請人非起造人者，應檢具移轉契約書或其他證明文件（第二款）。」前者（第一款）係在建築物使用執照無從確定申請人之建築物區分所有權、共用部分之客體範圍及位置時，由建築物區分所有人全體依協議確認各該客體之權利範圍及位置，以確定各建築物區分所有權及共用部分分別共有之內容；後者（第二款），則係為確定建築物區分所有權如具有移轉原因後，其所有權之歸屬狀態，均在以之作為地政機關實施測量與登記時客觀明確之程序依據。又該登記規則第七十五條第一款（九十年修正為第八十一條第一款）規定：「區分所有建物之共同使用部分，應另編建號，單獨登記，並依左列規定辦理：一、同一建物所屬各種共同使用部分，除法令另有規定外，應視各區分所有權人實際使用情形，分別合併，另編建號，單獨登記為各相關區分所有權人共有。但部分區分所有權人不需使用該共同使用部分者，得予除外。」係在規定區分所有建築物共用部分之登記方法。至其所稱共同使用部分，應視各區分所有權人實際使用情形，登記為各相關區分所有權人共有之規定，乃在提供認定是否為區分所有建築物共用部分之準據，亦即係以該部分之固有使用方法，性質上為建築物區分所有人利用該建築物所必要者而言。上開各規定均係基於區分所有建築物之專有部分及共用部分彼此間所有關係之複雜性，以及地政機關就登記內容所涉權利之有無，並無實體之判斷權（土地法第三十四條之一第六項、第四十六條之二第二項、第五十六條、第五十九條參照）而設，應未逾越土地法之授權範圍，且符合登記制度之前開意旨，為辦理區分所有建築物第一次測量、所有權登記程序上所必要，與民法第七百九十九條、第八百十七條第二項關於共用部分及其應有部分推定規定，兩者各有不同之規範功能及意旨，前開規則之規定難謂已增加法律所無之限制，與憲法第十五條財產權保障及第二十三條規定之法律保留原則及比例原則，尚無牴觸。
建築物（包含區分所有建築物）與土地同為法律上重要不動產之一種，土地法雖於第五條就建築改良物設定義規定，繼於第三十七條第一項，指明該法之土地登記，係謂土地及建築改良物之所有權與他項權利之登記，然關於建築物所有權之登記程序及其相關測量程序，不僅缺乏原則規定之明文，且涉及人民權利義務之重要事項者，諸如區分所有建築物區分所有人對於共用部分之認定、權屬之分配及應有部分之比例、就登記權利於當事人未能協議或發生爭議時之解決機制等，亦未如土地總登記於土地法或其他相關法律設相當之規範（土地法第三十八條第二項、第四十八條至第七十一條參照，此部分建築物則未及之），或完全委諸法規命令（土地登記規則第七十八條至第八十四條參照），本諸憲法保障人民財產權之意旨，均有未周，自應檢討改進，以法律明確規定為宜。
J. Y. Interpretation No. 600
Date 2005.7.22
Issue
Are the provisions of the Land Registration Regulations with respect to the initial survey and registration of divisionally owned buildings unconstitutional?
Holding
As registration of rights over immovables under the Land Law has the effect of public notice and creditability, the content registered must certainly be true and accurate to protect the people’s property right and to maintain security in transactions. The so-called immovables include land and buildings. Because a divisionally owned building is by nature a real property owned by a multiple number of persons of whom each owns a part, there exists a close and complex relationship among all owners in terms of their ownerships. Therefore, at the time of initial application for the registration of ownerships to such building, the scope of the object of each ownership must be clear and precise before the registration can be effected, so that the above purpose of the system of registration may be thoroughly realized. The Land Registration Regulations as amended on July 12, 1995, and the Regulations Governing the Implementation of Cadastral Surveys as amended on February 11, 1998, were both established by the Ministry of Interior under the authorization granted by the Land Law, Article 37, Paragraph 2, and Article 47, respectively. The Registration Regulations provide in Article 75, Subparagraph 1, for registration of the common area in a divisionally owned building, and Article 279, Paragraph 1, of the Survey Regulations is intended to determine the area and position of each part under individual ownership of a divisionally owned building as well as the part thereof in common use and the person to whom such individual ownership of the building belongs after transfer thereof, as a basis on which the land administration office may conduct the initial survey and registration of the divisionally owned building. Consequently, the provisions set forth in both Regulations have not gone beyond the scope of authorization granted by the Land Law and are consistent with the purpose of the registration system as stated above. They are essential for carrying out the procedure of the initial survey and registration of the ownership to a divisionally owned building, and have different normative functions and purposes from the provisions of the Civil Code, Article 799 and Article 817, Paragraph 2, with respect to presumed common use and the presumed equal share. It follows that such provisions should not be deemed to constitute restrictions not provided by law; nor do they conflict with the provision with respect to the protection of property right under Article 15 of the Constitution or the principle of reservation of law and the doctrine of proportionality embodied in Article 23 of the Constitution.
Like land, buildings (including divisionally owned buildings) are in law important real property. However, there is a lack of comprehensive protection of the people’s property right as required by the Constitution because no specific provisions are included in the Land Law and other relevant laws with respect to the procedure of registration of ownership in a building and the procedure of survey, wherein important matters in connection with the right and obligations of the people are involved, such as identification of the common area for individual owners to a divisionally owned building, distribution of right attributable to individual owners and the proportion of the shares, and the mechanism for resolving disagreements or disputes between parties over the registered rights. Therefore, review and improvements must be made by way of clear and specific provisions to be prescribed by law.
Reasoning
Article 15 of the Constitution, which provides for the protection of the people’s property right, is intended to ensure that individuals may exercise their right and power to make free use of, receive benefits from and dispose of their property in the condition as it exists (See J. Y. Interpretation No. 400). To protect the people’s property right and to safeguard in the meantime other persons’ freedom and the public interest, the legislature may, to the extent consistent with the doctrine of proportionality under Article 23 of the Constitution, establish various property systems to regulate the exercise of such right, by enacting laws or conferring upon administrative agencies clear authority to establish regulations for such purposes. The right over immovables is a property right protected by the Constitution. The Civil Code provides in Article 758 that: “A right over immovables, which is acquired, created, lost or altered in consequence of a juristic act, is not effective unless it is duly registered.” The Code also provides in Article 759: “A person who has acquired a right over an immovable by succession, compulsory execution, expropriation or a judgment of the court before registration, may not dispose of such right unless it is duly registered.” Thus, registration of the right is a requisite to alteration to or disposal of a right over an immovable, and a registration system is established by the Land Law and the regulations enabled thereby to govern the registration of rights over immovables. The registration of a right over an immovable perfected pursuant to the procedure required by such land law and regulations results in sufficient effect of public notice and credibility of the registration of such right. (See the Land Law, Article 43, and our Interpretation Yuan Tze No.1956). It is an important system for ensuring that all persons may exercise their right and power to make free use of, receive benefits from and dispose of their property. The registration must therefore be effectuated according to strict procedures, and the contents registered must undoubtedly be true and accurate to the extent that they agree completely with the true jural relations pertaining to the real property so that the people’s property right may be protected and the security in transactions may be maintained.
The so-called immovables include land and buildings. A divisionally owned building is by nature a real property owned by a multiple number of persons of whom each owns a part, and each individual owner has not only a title to the part belonging to him or her exclusively but also co-ownership to the part other than the exclusive parts of the building and its accessories, namely the part in common use, in the share to which he is entitled. (See the Civil Code, Article 799, and the Condominiums and Residential Buildings Act, Article 3, Subparagraphs 2, 3 and 4), and such part in common use varies in position and area, depending upon the structure, design and function of the buildings as well as whether it is a part for common use by all individual owners because it is under co-ownership of all individual owners or it is a part for common use by some of the individual owners. The objects of ownerships of individual owners to the building being physically connected with each other and inseparable so far as their use is concerned, there exists a close and complex relationship among all owners in terms of their ownerships to the common area as well as their exclusive portions. Therefore, at the time of initial application for the registration of ownerships to a divisionally owned building, the scope of the object of such ownerships, namely the area and position of each exclusively owned part and the common area, must be clear and precise before the registration can be effected, so that the above purpose of the system of registration may be thoroughly realized.
While the Civil Code provides in Article 799 and Article 817, Paragraph 2, for a rule of presumption in substantive law with respect to the part of a building under co-ownership and the individual shares thereto, more specific technical regulation of the registration procedure provided in the Act of Registration of Rights over immovables in respect of the procedure of registration of rights over immovables and survey is certainly allowable to ensure the accuracy and truthfulness of registration. In other words, while the rights of the individual owners are protected by the Civil Code, as cited above, if the common area of a divisionally owned building is not yet registered or is under dispute, the procedure of registration established by the Act of Registration of Rights over immovables must be followed when processing the registration of the right to such common area to ensure accurate registration of the right. The Land Registration Regulations as amended on July 12, 1995, and the Regulations Governing the Implementation of Cadastral Surveys as amended on February 11, 1998, were both established by the Ministry of Interior under the authorization granted by the Land Law, Article 37, Paragraph 2, and Article 47, then in force. Said Survey Regulations provide in Article 279, Paragraph 1, that “To apply for initial survey of a building, the applicant shall fill out an application form and submit the same together with the building use license and a layout drawing of the completed building and a photocopy thereof. In any of the following circumstances, the applicant shall submit such documents and photocopies thereof as may be required by applicable provisions: 1) A written agreement of distribution signed by all builders if the scope and position in a divisionally owned building to which the applicant is entitled is not identifiable based on the use license (Subparagraph 1); and 2) A transfer agreement or other documents if the applicant is not a builder (Subparagraph 2).” Subparagraph 1 is intended to ascertain the scope and position of the individual area owned by the applicant as well as the area under ownership in common in a building based on the agreement of all individual owners, if they are not identifiable by looking at the use license, and Subparagraph 2 is intended to identify the person to whom the ownership belongs in the case of any cause of transfer of the individual ownership to a divisionally owned building. Both are intended to provide the land administration office with an objective and precise legal basis for carrying out the survey and processing the registration. Furthermore, the Registration Regulations provide in Article 75, Subparagraph 1 (re-numbered Article 81, Subparagraph 1, as amended in 2001): “The common area in a building shall be assigned a separate building number and separately registered, and shall be dealt with pursuant to the following provisions: 1) Unless otherwise prescribed by law, each type of common area in the same building shall be combined and separately numbered and shall be separately registered as being co-owned by individual owners interested therein by taking into consideration the actual use made by such individual owners; provided however that the individual owners who do not need to use such common areas may be excluded.” The purpose of this subparagraph is to specify the practice of registration of the common areas of buildings under divided ownership. The requirement that the common area shall be registered as being co-owned by individual owners interested therein by taking into consideration the actual use made by such individual owners is intended to provide a basis for determining whether the area is a common area of a divisionally owned building; namely, whether the area, by its nature, is essential to the use of the building by its individual owners in light of the inherent usage of that part. The above provisions are made in view of the complex relations between the titles to the individual part and the common area of a divisionally owned building and the fact that the land administration agency has no power to make substantive judgment on the existence or non-existence of the right for which registration is applied (See the Land Law, Article 34-1, Paragraph 6; Article 46-2, Paragraph 2; Articles 56 and 59) within the scope of authority granted by the Land Law, and are consistent with the aforementioned purposes of the system of registration and essential to the procedure of ownership registration as well as the initial survey of divisionally owned buildings. Such provisions differ in normative functions and purposes from the presumptive provisions set forth in the Civil Code, Article 799 and Article 817, Paragraph 2, with respect to the part in common use and the individual shares, and should not be deemed to be imposing restrictions not provided for by law; nor are they contrary to Article 15 or the Constitution, which accords protection to property rights, or the principle of reservation of law and the principle of proportionality under Article 23 thereof.
Like land, buildings (including divisionally owned buildings) are in law important real property. While the Land Law defines in Article 5 the meaning of constructional improvements and provides specifically in Article 37, Paragraph 1, that land registration means the registration of the ownership to and other rights over land and constructional improvements thereon, no specific provisions, similar to those regulating the general registration of land, are included in the Land Law or in any other relevant laws with respect to the procedure of registration of ownership in a building and the procedure of survey or such important matters in connection with the right and obligations of the people with respect to identification of the common area by individual owners of a building under divided ownership, distribution of right attributable to individual owners and the proportion of the shares, the mechanism for resolving disagreements or disputes between parties over the registered rights (See the Land Law, Article 38, Paragraph 2, and Articles 48 to 71. This part of the text does not mention buildings), or such matters are being regulated by legal orders instead of laws (See the Land Registration Regulations, Articles 78 to 84). Hence, there is a lack of comprehensive protection of the people’s property right as required by the Constitution. Therefore, review and improvements must be made by way of clear and specific provisions to be prescribed by law.
' Translated by Raymond T. Chu.
解釋字號： 釋字第 600 號
解釋日期： 民國 94 年 07 月 22 日
解釋爭點：
土地登記規則等就區分所有建物首次測量、登記之規定違憲?
資料來源：
司法周刊 第 1246 期 1 版
司法院公報 第 47 卷 9 期 1-19 頁
考選周刊 第 1027 期 3 版
法令月刊 第 56 卷 8 期 91-93 頁
總統府公報 第 6651 號 12-45 頁
相關法條：
中華民國憲法 第 15、23 條 ( 36.01.01 )
民法 第 799、817 條 ( 91.06.26 )
土地法 第 36、37、47 條 ( 84.01.20 )
土地登記規則 第 75 條 ( 84.07.12 )
地籍測量實施規則 第 279 條 ( 87.02.11 )
解 釋 文：
依土地法所為之不動產物權登記具有公示力與公信力，登記之內容自須正確真實，以確保人民之財產權及維護交易之安全。不動產包括土地及建築物，性質上為不動產之區分所有建築物，因係數人區分一建築物而各有其一部，各所有人所享有之所有權，其關係密切而複雜，故就此等建築物辦理第一次所有權登記時，各該所有權客體之範圍必須客觀明確，方得據以登記，俾貫徹登記制度之上述意旨。內政部於中華民國八十四年七月十二日修正發布之土地登記規則與八十七年二月十一日修正發布之地籍測量實施規則分別係依土地法第三十七條第二項及第四十七條之授權所訂定。該登記規則第七十五條第一款乃係規定區分所有建築物共用部分之登記方法。上開實施規則第二百七十九條第一項之規定，旨在確定區分所有建築物之各區分所有權客體及其共用部分之權利範圍及位置，與建築物區分所有權移轉後之歸屬，以作為地政機關實施區分所有建築物第一次測量及登記之依據。是上開土地登記規則及地籍測量實施規則之規定，並未逾越土地法授權範圍，亦符合登記制度之首開意旨，為辦理區分所有建築物第一次測量、所有權登記程序所必要，且與民法第七百九十九條、第八百十七條第二項關於共用部分及其應有部分推定規定，各有不同之規範功能及意旨，難謂已增加法律所無之限制，與憲法第十五條財產權保障及第二十三條規定之法律保留原則及比例原則，尚無牴觸。
建築物 (包含區分所有建築物) 與土地同為法律上重要不動產之一種，關於其所有權之登記程序及其相關測量程序，涉及人民權利義務之重要事項者，諸如區分所有建築物區分所有人對於共用部分之認定、權屬之分配及應有部分之比例、就登記權利於當事人未能協議或發生爭議時之解決機制等，於土地法或其他相關法律未設明文，本諸憲法保障人民財產權之意旨，尚有未周，應檢討改進，以法律明確規定為宜。
理 由 書：
憲法第十五條規定，人民之財產權應予保障，旨在確保個人依財產之存續狀態行使其自由使用、收益及處分之權能（本院釋字第四００號解釋參照）。立法機關為確保人民財產權，並兼顧他人自由與公共利益之維護，得在符合憲法第二十三條比例原則之範圍內，制定法律或明確授權行政機關訂定法規命令，形成各種財產制度予以規範。不動產物權為憲法上所保障之財產權，民法第七百五十八條規定：「不動產物權，依法律行為而取得、設定、喪失及變更者，非經登記，不生效力。」同法第七百五十九條規定：「因繼承、強制執行、公用徵收或法院之判決，於登記前已取得不動產物權者，非經登記，不得處分其物權。」是不動產物權登記為不動產物權變動或處分之要件。土地法及其授權訂定之法令乃設有登記制度，以為辦理不動產物權登記之準據。依土地法令所設程序辦理上開不動產物權登記，足生不動產物權登記之公示力與公信力（土地法第四十三條、本院院字第一九五六號解釋參照），為確保個人自由使用、收益及處分不動產物權之重要制度，故登記須遵守嚴謹之程序，一經登記，其登記內容更須正確真實，俾與不動產上之真實權利關係完全一致，以保障人民之財產權及維護交易之安全。
不動產包含土地及建築物，性質上為不動產之區分所有建築物係數人區分一建築物而各有其一部，各區分所有人不僅對其專有部分享有所有權，並對該建築物專有部分以外之其他部分及其附屬物亦即共用部分，依一定之應有部分而共有之（民法第七百九十九條、公寓大廈管理條例第三條第二、三、四款參照），而共用部分不僅因建築物結構、形式或功用之不同致其位置、範圍有異，且又因是否為全部區分所有人所共有，而有全部區分所有人之共用部分及部分區分所有人之共用部分之別；建築物區分所有人對各該所有權之客體，於物理上相互連接，在使用上亦屬密不可分，各所有人所享有之專有部分及共用部分，彼此間之權利關係密切而錯綜複雜。於辦理區分所有建築物第一次所有權登記時，各該所有權客體即專有部分及共用部分之範圍及位置等自須客觀明確，地政機關方得據以登記，俾貫徹登記制度之上述意旨。
民法第七百九十九條、第八百十七條第二項關於共用部分及其應有部分雖設有推定之實體法原則規定，但為確保登記內容正確真實，關於規定不動產物權登記與測量程序之不動產物權登記程序法，就其登記程序自非不得為較具體之技術性規範。易言之，區分所有建築物之共用部分若尚未登記或有爭執者，區分所有人之權利固受民法上開規定之保障，然若辦理登記時，為求登記權利內容之詳實，則仍應依不動產物權登記程序法所設之登記程序為之。內政部八十四年七月十二日修正發布之土地登記規則與八十七年二月十一日修正發布之地籍測量實施規則係分別依當時之土地法第三十七條第二項及第四十七條之授權所訂定。上開實施規則第二百七十九條第一項規定：「申請建物第一次測量，應填具申請書，檢附建物使用執照、竣工平面圖及其影本，其有下列情形之一者，並應依各該規定檢附文件正本及其影本：一、區分所有建物，依其使用執照無法認定申請人之權利範圍及位置者，應檢具全體起造人分配協議書（第一款）。二、申請人非起造人者，應檢具移轉契約書或其他證明文件（第二款）。」前者（第一款）係在建築物使用執照無從確定申請人之建築物區分所有權、共用部分之客體範圍及位置時，由建築物區分所有人全體依協議確認各該客體之權利範圍及位置，以確定各建築物區分所有權及共用部分分別共有之內容；後者（第二款），則係為確定建築物區分所有權如具有移轉原因後，其所有權之歸屬狀態，均在以之作為地政機關實施測量與登記時客觀明確之程序依據。又該登記規則第七十五條第一款（九十年修正為第八十一條第一款）規定：「區分所有建物之共同使用部分，應另編建號，單獨登記，並依左列規定辦理：一、同一建物所屬各種共同使用部分，除法令另有規定外，應視各區分所有權人實際使用情形，分別合併，另編建號，單獨登記為各相關區分所有權人共有。但部分區分所有權人不需使用該共同使用部分者，得予除外。」係在規定區分所有建築物共用部分之登記方法。至其所稱共同使用部分，應視各區分所有權人實際使用情形，登記為各相關區分所有權人共有之規定，乃在提供認定是否為區分所有建築物共用部分之準據，亦即係以該部分之固有使用方法，性質上為建築物區分所有人利用該建築物所必要者而言。上開各規定均係基於區分所有建築物之專有部分及共用部分彼此間所有關係之複雜性，以及地政機關就登記內容所涉權利之有無，並無實體之判斷權（土地法第三十四條之一第六項、第四十六條之二第二項、第五十六條、第五十九條參照）而設，應未逾越土地法之授權範圍，且符合登記制度之前開意旨，為辦理區分所有建築物第一次測量、所有權登記程序上所必要，與民法第七百九十九條、第八百十七條第二項關於共用部分及其應有部分推定規定，兩者各有不同之規範功能及意旨，前開規則之規定難謂已增加法律所無之限制，與憲法第十五條財產權保障及第二十三條規定之法律保留原則及比例原則，尚無牴觸。
建築物（包含區分所有建築物）與土地同為法律上重要不動產之一種，土地法雖於第五條就建築改良物設定義規定，繼於第三十七條第一項，指明該法之土地登記，係謂土地及建築改良物之所有權與他項權利之登記，然關於建築物所有權之登記程序及其相關測量程序，不僅缺乏原則規定之明文，且涉及人民權利義務之重要事項者，諸如區分所有建築物區分所有人對於共用部分之認定、權屬之分配及應有部分之比例、就登記權利於當事人未能協議或發生爭議時之解決機制等，亦未如土地總登記於土地法或其他相關法律設相當之規範（土地法第三十八條第二項、第四十八條至第七十一條參照，此部分建築物則未及之），或完全委諸法規命令（土地登記規則第七十八條至第八十四條參照），本諸憲法保障人民財產權之意旨，均有未周，自應檢討改進，以法律明確規定為宜。
J. Y. Interpretation No. 600
Date 2005.7.22
Issue
Are the provisions of the Land Registration Regulations with respect to the initial survey and registration of divisionally owned buildings unconstitutional?
Holding
As registration of rights over immovables under the Land Law has the effect of public notice and creditability, the content registered must certainly be true and accurate to protect the people’s property right and to maintain security in transactions. The so-called immovables include land and buildings. Because a divisionally owned building is by nature a real property owned by a multiple number of persons of whom each owns a part, there exists a close and complex relationship among all owners in terms of their ownerships. Therefore, at the time of initial application for the registration of ownerships to such building, the scope of the object of each ownership must be clear and precise before the registration can be effected, so that the above purpose of the system of registration may be thoroughly realized. The Land Registration Regulations as amended on July 12, 1995, and the Regulations Governing the Implementation of Cadastral Surveys as amended on February 11, 1998, were both established by the Ministry of Interior under the authorization granted by the Land Law, Article 37, Paragraph 2, and Article 47, respectively. The Registration Regulations provide in Article 75, Subparagraph 1, for registration of the common area in a divisionally owned building, and Article 279, Paragraph 1, of the Survey Regulations is intended to determine the area and position of each part under individual ownership of a divisionally owned building as well as the part thereof in common use and the person to whom such individual ownership of the building belongs after transfer thereof, as a basis on which the land administration office may conduct the initial survey and registration of the divisionally owned building. Consequently, the provisions set forth in both Regulations have not gone beyond the scope of authorization granted by the Land Law and are consistent with the purpose of the registration system as stated above. They are essential for carrying out the procedure of the initial survey and registration of the ownership to a divisionally owned building, and have different normative functions and purposes from the provisions of the Civil Code, Article 799 and Article 817, Paragraph 2, with respect to presumed common use and the presumed equal share. It follows that such provisions should not be deemed to constitute restrictions not provided by law; nor do they conflict with the provision with respect to the protection of property right under Article 15 of the Constitution or the principle of reservation of law and the doctrine of proportionality embodied in Article 23 of the Constitution.
Like land, buildings (including divisionally owned buildings) are in law important real property. However, there is a lack of comprehensive protection of the people’s property right as required by the Constitution because no specific provisions are included in the Land Law and other relevant laws with respect to the procedure of registration of ownership in a building and the procedure of survey, wherein important matters in connection with the right and obligations of the people are involved, such as identification of the common area for individual owners to a divisionally owned building, distribution of right attributable to individual owners and the proportion of the shares, and the mechanism for resolving disagreements or disputes between parties over the registered rights. Therefore, review and improvements must be made by way of clear and specific provisions to be prescribed by law.
Reasoning
Article 15 of the Constitution, which provides for the protection of the people’s property right, is intended to ensure that individuals may exercise their right and power to make free use of, receive benefits from and dispose of their property in the condition as it exists (See J. Y. Interpretation No. 400). To protect the people’s property right and to safeguard in the meantime other persons’ freedom and the public interest, the legislature may, to the extent consistent with the doctrine of proportionality under Article 23 of the Constitution, establish various property systems to regulate the exercise of such right, by enacting laws or conferring upon administrative agencies clear authority to establish regulations for such purposes. The right over immovables is a property right protected by the Constitution. The Civil Code provides in Article 758 that: “A right over immovables, which is acquired, created, lost or altered in consequence of a juristic act, is not effective unless it is duly registered.” The Code also provides in Article 759: “A person who has acquired a right over an immovable by succession, compulsory execution, expropriation or a judgment of the court before registration, may not dispose of such right unless it is duly registered.” Thus, registration of the right is a requisite to alteration to or disposal of a right over an immovable, and a registration system is established by the Land Law and the regulations enabled thereby to govern the registration of rights over immovables. The registration of a right over an immovable perfected pursuant to the procedure required by such land law and regulations results in sufficient effect of public notice and credibility of the registration of such right. (See the Land Law, Article 43, and our Interpretation Yuan Tze No.1956). It is an important system for ensuring that all persons may exercise their right and power to make free use of, receive benefits from and dispose of their property. The registration must therefore be effectuated according to strict procedures, and the contents registered must undoubtedly be true and accurate to the extent that they agree completely with the true jural relations pertaining to the real property so that the people’s property right may be protected and the security in transactions may be maintained.
The so-called immovables include land and buildings. A divisionally owned building is by nature a real property owned by a multiple number of persons of whom each owns a part, and each individual owner has not only a title to the part belonging to him or her exclusively but also co-ownership to the part other than the exclusive parts of the building and its accessories, namely the part in common use, in the share to which he is entitled. (See the Civil Code, Article 799, and the Condominiums and Residential Buildings Act, Article 3, Subparagraphs 2, 3 and 4), and such part in common use varies in position and area, depending upon the structure, design and function of the buildings as well as whether it is a part for common use by all individual owners because it is under co-ownership of all individual owners or it is a part for common use by some of the individual owners. The objects of ownerships of individual owners to the building being physically connected with each other and inseparable so far as their use is concerned, there exists a close and complex relationship among all owners in terms of their ownerships to the common area as well as their exclusive portions. Therefore, at the time of initial application for the registration of ownerships to a divisionally owned building, the scope of the object of such ownerships, namely the area and position of each exclusively owned part and the common area, must be clear and precise before the registration can be effected, so that the above purpose of the system of registration may be thoroughly realized.
While the Civil Code provides in Article 799 and Article 817, Paragraph 2, for a rule of presumption in substantive law with respect to the part of a building under co-ownership and the individual shares thereto, more specific technical regulation of the registration procedure provided in the Act of Registration of Rights over immovables in respect of the procedure of registration of rights over immovables and survey is certainly allowable to ensure the accuracy and truthfulness of registration. In other words, while the rights of the individual owners are protected by the Civil Code, as cited above, if the common area of a divisionally owned building is not yet registered or is under dispute, the procedure of registration established by the Act of Registration of Rights over immovables must be followed when processing the registration of the right to such common area to ensure accurate registration of the right. The Land Registration Regulations as amended on July 12, 1995, and the Regulations Governing the Implementation of Cadastral Surveys as amended on February 11, 1998, were both established by the Ministry of Interior under the authorization granted by the Land Law, Article 37, Paragraph 2, and Article 47, then in force. Said Survey Regulations provide in Article 279, Paragraph 1, that “To apply for initial survey of a building, the applicant shall fill out an application form and submit the same together with the building use license and a layout drawing of the completed building and a photocopy thereof. In any of the following circumstances, the applicant shall submit such documents and photocopies thereof as may be required by applicable provisions: 1) A written agreement of distribution signed by all builders if the scope and position in a divisionally owned building to which the applicant is entitled is not identifiable based on the use license (Subparagraph 1); and 2) A transfer agreement or other documents if the applicant is not a builder (Subparagraph 2).” Subparagraph 1 is intended to ascertain the scope and position of the individual area owned by the applicant as well as the area under ownership in common in a building based on the agreement of all individual owners, if they are not identifiable by looking at the use license, and Subparagraph 2 is intended to identify the person to whom the ownership belongs in the case of any cause of transfer of the individual ownership to a divisionally owned building. Both are intended to provide the land administration office with an objective and precise legal basis for carrying out the survey and processing the registration. Furthermore, the Registration Regulations provide in Article 75, Subparagraph 1 (re-numbered Article 81, Subparagraph 1, as amended in 2001): “The common area in a building shall be assigned a separate building number and separately registered, and shall be dealt with pursuant to the following provisions: 1) Unless otherwise prescribed by law, each type of common area in the same building shall be combined and separately numbered and shall be separately registered as being co-owned by individual owners interested therein by taking into consideration the actual use made by such individual owners; provided however that the individual owners who do not need to use such common areas may be excluded.” The purpose of this subparagraph is to specify the practice of registration of the common areas of buildings under divided ownership. The requirement that the common area shall be registered as being co-owned by individual owners interested therein by taking into consideration the actual use made by such individual owners is intended to provide a basis for determining whether the area is a common area of a divisionally owned building; namely, whether the area, by its nature, is essential to the use of the building by its individual owners in light of the inherent usage of that part. The above provisions are made in view of the complex relations between the titles to the individual part and the common area of a divisionally owned building and the fact that the land administration agency has no power to make substantive judgment on the existence or non-existence of the right for which registration is applied (See the Land Law, Article 34-1, Paragraph 6; Article 46-2, Paragraph 2; Articles 56 and 59) within the scope of authority granted by the Land Law, and are consistent with the aforementioned purposes of the system of registration and essential to the procedure of ownership registration as well as the initial survey of divisionally owned buildings. Such provisions differ in normative functions and purposes from the presumptive provisions set forth in the Civil Code, Article 799 and Article 817, Paragraph 2, with respect to the part in common use and the individual shares, and should not be deemed to be imposing restrictions not provided for by law; nor are they contrary to Article 15 or the Constitution, which accords protection to property rights, or the principle of reservation of law and the principle of proportionality under Article 23 thereof.
Like land, buildings (including divisionally owned buildings) are in law important real property. While the Land Law defines in Article 5 the meaning of constructional improvements and provides specifically in Article 37, Paragraph 1, that land registration means the registration of the ownership to and other rights over land and constructional improvements thereon, no specific provisions, similar to those regulating the general registration of land, are included in the Land Law or in any other relevant laws with respect to the procedure of registration of ownership in a building and the procedure of survey or such important matters in connection with the right and obligations of the people with respect to identification of the common area by individual owners of a building under divided ownership, distribution of right attributable to individual owners and the proportion of the shares, the mechanism for resolving disagreements or disputes between parties over the registered rights (See the Land Law, Article 38, Paragraph 2, and Articles 48 to 71. This part of the text does not mention buildings), or such matters are being regulated by legal orders instead of laws (See the Land Registration Regulations, Articles 78 to 84). Hence, there is a lack of comprehensive protection of the people’s property right as required by the Constitution. Therefore, review and improvements must be made by way of clear and specific provisions to be prescribed by law.
' Translated by Raymond T. Chu.
今日瀏覽人數：3247 總瀏覽人數：9497015
|
帝謙高雄法律事務所 | 關於高雄律師 | 高雄法律顧問 | 高雄律師服務項目 | 不動產律師 | 高雄律師專欄 | 高雄律師法律諮詢 | 高雄律師最新消息 | 聯絡高雄律師 |
|
電話：(07)558-9090 傳真：(07)558-9010 地址：813 高雄市左營區明華一路350號11樓之2  Copyright © 2013-2015 Deep-Change Law Firm, All Rights Reserved 網頁設計:uuTaiwan |
友情連結 |
帝謙法律事務所是國內專業的律師事務所，我們提供專業的法律諮詢、民事訴訟、刑事訴訟、行政訴訟訴願、保險理賠、撰寫存證信函、律師信函、不動產法律、遺產繼承規劃、常年法律顧問、契約撰擬…及其他法律專案，高雄律師團隊經驗豐富、辦案認真，積極處理並以同理心處理每個客戶所委託的案件。