您的瀏覽器不支援JavaScript語法,但是並不影響您獲取本網站的內容
司法院內部與外部景觀圖片動畫
::: | | 大法官 | 案件審理 | 大法官解釋 | 相關法規 | |
 
多條件查詢頁面按鈕

 

:::
 

大法官解釋表頭

(釋字第 93 號 )      友善列印PRINT  
Interpretation
J.Y.
Interpretation
NO.93 
Date 1961/12/6
Issue Should a convenience track be considered immovable property?
Holding
1
    A convenience track that is adjacent to contiguous plots of land and has some kind of economic purpose is considered to be immovable property, unless it is used for some temporary purpose.


Reasoning
1
    Pursuant to Article 66, Paragraph 1, of the Civil Code, “a fixed object” refers to something that is not a component of contiguous plots of land and is continuously adjacent to such land, has some kind of economic purpose and is not easily moved. Unless it is used for some temporary purpose, a convenience track should be continuously adjacent to land. Even if a structure is built on a convenience track (such as a house), the convenience track does not lose its nature of a fixed object. Thus, a convenience track should be considered as immovable property.

'Translated by Lawrence L. C. Lee.

Opinion Chinese only
 

BACK

 
 
::: Home 中文(Chinese) Site Map
 
使用聲明 Copyright©2004 JUSTICES OF THE CONSTITUTIONSL COURT. JUDICIAL YUAN 本網站建議使用解析度為1024*768全彩及Explorer5.5以上瀏覽器     通過A+等級無障礙網頁檢測
多條件查詢頁面連結點 解釋爭點總覽頁面連結點