|期刊名稱||政大法學評論, No.127, pp.53-115|
|摘要||工程契約因其規範之專業龐雜，往往須定作人之協力，如由定作人提供工程用地、供給材料，或由定作人指示，或須定作人到場，始得完成者，定作人不為其行為，即無由完成工作。近來於國際間漸有以誠信與公平交易原則為核心，產生「合作義務」（duty to co-operate）之概念，取代協力究為真正義務或不真正義務之爭鳴。本文即以工程契約定作人用地提供行為為中心，探討邇近國際間「合作義務」之根源、理論與其實踐，包括於國際間契約法原則與國際工程契約範本之展現，及德、英、美、日等地區之發展現狀，期能藉由比較法之觀察提供借鏡，探求在我國現行法規範及工程契約範本未見完備之現況下，可能尋求之解決方案。
Construction contract is famous for its complicated and specialized character. It requires co-operation from the employer for providing site and materials, either a set of instructions or physical presence to enable the performance of contracts; otherwise, there is no basis for fulfilling their requirements. Recently a call of ‘duty to co-operate’ has come into being under the umbrella of the principles of good faith and fair dealing to mitigate the debate on the nature of employers’ obligations. This paper therefore focuses on the study of site-providing by employers in construction contracts in order to explore the foundation, doctrine and practices of the principle of the duty to co-operate within the principles of international contract laws and global construction contracts, as well as the legislation in the countries of England, the United States, Germany and Japan. The comparative nature of this study, it is hoped, should inspire the development of construction contract legislation in Taiwan.