EPA-96-K105-02-206

096

1,900 千元

2007/03/01

2007/12/31

曾憲郎

管考處

劉建中

國立中山大學

噪音振動

高速鐵路噪音與振動,公害陳情,被害忍受限度,公害糾紛處理制度

Taiwan High Speed Rail,Noise,Vibration,Public Nuisance Dispute

張本,燦

黃信鐘

0931118768

jack_19751221@hotmail.com

本研究計畫係二年專案工作計畫，本次計畫為第一年計畫，已如期在預計期間內執行完畢，工作內容可摘要為： （一）彙整日本、韓國等國的高速鐵路、鐵路等大眾運輸工具有關噪音或振動的司法判例，以及公害陳情及糾紛的行政處理重要處理案例資料，並加以探討分析。同時收集日本及韓國的重大案例資料建置環保署網站。 1.司法判例： 分析整理如日本的東海道新幹線訴訟事件、大阪國際機場噪音訴訟事件、九州新幹線鹿兒島路段訴訟事件等之主要爭點、判決理由等。從而探討噪音振動之忍受限度、違法性的法理，以及如高鐵此類具有公共性、社會有用性設施所引起公害問題與居民受害間之權衡與輕重取捨問題等。 2.行政處理案例： 整合日本與韓國至目前為止有關高速鐵路等大眾運輸工具的陳情協談及糾紛處理的重要案例，並分析探討其糾紛的爭議點、處理經過、處理原則及行政的因應對策等處理之機制、模式及成果。 （二）針對我國目前的公害糾紛處理途徑如損害賠償民事訴訟之提起；陳情、和解、請願、訴願；鄉鎮巿調解委員會之調解；依國家賠償法之損害求償；透過公害糾紛處理法制之紓處、調處及裁定等損害求償的處理機制進行探討分析。 （三）彙整我國高速鐵路等大眾運輸工具營運後所發生噪音或振動的實務案例，分析其糾紛之爭議點，並全盤檢討現行處理機制及運作方式等。 （四）基於（二）及（三）之對我國現況的分析基礎及考察成果，並綜合對日本及韓國的判例及行政處理個案之比較分析，藉以探討出我國與日本、韓國的高速鐵路等大眾運輸工具噪音振動公害陳情、糾紛處理趨勢、特徵，以及制度法規在適用個案時的運作機制、優劣點及課題等。 （五）今年的10月30日已在國內舉辦了一次高鐵噪音振動公害糾紛座談會，邀集了我國公害糾紛相關領域之學者、專家與交通部高鐵局、高鐵公司相關人員，還有各級環保機關業務相關人員與會，針對高鐵糾紛問題點之解決途徑、改善或可行方式等方面進行了寶貴意見之溝通及交流。 (六) 整合以上諸階段的研究探討及比較分析後，再度回顧檢討我國現有公害糾紛處理體系之機制，是否能夠滿足我國的高速鐵路等大眾運輸工具的噪音振動問題之解決需求，並進一步提出適合於現階段的相關立法行政建議，以供國內之參考。

高速鐵路噪音與振動,公害陳情,被害忍受限度,公害糾紛處理制度

EPA-96-K105-02-206.pdf

18MB

[期末報告]公開完整版

2008/3/1 上午 12:00:00

This is a two-year research project which is sponsored by Environmental Protection Administration, during the first year, we have accomplished at least the following four tasks. 1.We have collected and analyzed the judicial lawsuit cases and the administrative dispute disposal cases concerning the public nuisance such as noise or vibration caused by Mass Transportation vehicle including Taiwan High Speed Rail, Japanese Shinkansen Bullet Train and Korea Train Express. 2.We have spent a lot of time and efforts in studying various dispute disposal system of public nuisance in Taiwan, such as to bring a civil lawsuit to request compensation for damages, citizen complaints referral service, reconciliation, petition arbitration through village town and city arbitration committee to request compensation for damage, to request compensation according to the State Compensation Act, reconciliation, arbitration through administrative dispute settlement system of public nuisance . 3.We have explored the actual cases of the above-mentioned public nuisance dispute problems particularly focused on the point of dispute between the plaintiff residents along the railroad or around the airport and the defendant such as high speed rail corporation or government. We checked the lawsuits of Tokaido Shinkansen Bullet Train, Osaka International Airport, and Kyushu Shinkansen Bullet Train kagoshima Route. The courts describe the results of experiments concerning the impact of noise on sleep and point out that the noise disturbs the plaintiffs’ sleep and prevents them from recovering from fatigue and that noise of train or airplane disrupts the daily life of residents. It disturbs daily conversations, telephone conversations, and the reception of television and radio broadcasts. It is presumed that noise seriously affects intellectual exercise like reading, writing, and thinking. It lowers work productivity, especially during the evening hours, it disrupts family conversations and togetherness and creates adverse effects on family relations and associations with friends and relatives. The courts also find that the noise also effects education. It is presumed that even after the school building were sound-proofed(an action which reduced noise by 30dB), classroom work was still disturbed, and educational activities outside the buildings were exposed to the same noise as before. One also cannot deny that schoolchildren are disturbed when studying at home, and that students preparing for their entrance examinations have been seriously disadvantaged. Because the railroads, trains and the airport are clearly public facilities established and controlled by the government, therefore, the Civil Code art.709 and the State Compensation Act art.2(1) are applicable to these cases. We found therefore , that there have been defects in the establishment and management of the railroad and the airport and that the plaintiffs’ harms have been caused by these defects. The plaintiffs of the above-mentioned cases requested compensation in damages for past harms and attorney’s fee, and the requests were granted, but the injunction requested by Tokaido Shinkansen lawsuit and Osaka International Airport lawsuit were not granted owing to the public nature of those facilities. On October 30, 2007, we have held a conversazione by inviting the staffs of Environmental Protection Administration and Environmental Protection Bureau and Taiwan High Speed Rail Corporation to discuss the problems and resolutions of public nuisance for noise and vibration caused by Taiwan high speed rail. 4 .Through the analysis and comparison of the problems and disposal system of the above-mentioned public nuisance caused in Japan and Korea, we re-examine the present mechanism for managing the public nuisance dispute problem in Taiwan to see if those system in Japan and Korea can fit and resolve the public nuisance dispute problems caused by Taiwan high speed rail. It should be noted, finally, that the suggestions about the relevant legislative and administrative measures have been proposed in our final report.

Taiwan High Speed Rail,Noise,Vibration,Public Nuisance Dispute