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 185 號 )      友善列印PRINT  
Interpretation
J.Y.
Interpretation
NO.185 
Date 1984/1/27
Issue Concerning the statute or ordinance upon which a final and irrevocable judgment relies or the opinion expressed on such statute or ordinance wherein is held unconstitutional by the Grand Justices Council upon a petition by the interested person for interpretation, is the party against whom such final and irrevocable judgment is entered entitled to file for a retrial or an extraordinary appeal on the basis of said interpretation?
Holding   Pursuant to Article 78 of the Constitution, the Judicial Yuan is vested with the power to interpret the Constitution, and to provide uniform interpretations with respect to statutes and ordinances. The interpretations of the Judicial Yuan shall be binding upon every institution and person in the country, and each institution shall abide by the meaning of these interpretations in handling relevant matters. Prior precedents which are contrary to these interpretations shall automatically be nullified. In the case of a final and irrevocable judgment where the statute or ordinance or the interpretation of such statute or ordinance applied in rendering such judgment is deemed contrary to the Constitution pursuant to an interpretation rendered by this Judicial Yuan upon an application by the interested person for such an interpretation, the party against whom such final and irrevocable judgment is entered shall be entitled to file for a retrial or an extraordinary appeal on the basis of said interpretation, and this should not be construed as mere differences in legal interpretations. As such, any part of Precedent P.T. No.610 (Ad. Ct., 1973) contrary to this Interpretation shall cease to apply.
Reasoning   Pursuant to Article 78 of the Constitution, the Judicial Yuan is vested with the power to interpret the Constitution, and to provide uniform interpretations with respect to statutes and ordinances. The intent is to have the Judicial Yuan assume the responsibility of clarifying and enunciating the correct meaning of the Constitution and statutes and ordinances. The interpretations thus rendered shall be binding upon every institution and person in the country, and each institution shall abide by the meaning of these interpretations in handling relevant matters. Prior precedents which are contrary to these interpretations shall automatically be nullified.

  According to Article 171, Paragraph 1, and Article 172 of the Constitution, a statute is nullified if it is contrary to the Constitution and an ordinance is nullified if it is contrary to the Constitution or a statute. In the case of a final and irrevocable judgment where the statute or ordinance or the interpretation of such statute or ordinance applied in rendering such judgment is suspected of being contrary to the Constitution, and then confirmed to be indeed contrary to the Constitution pursuant to an interpretation rendered by this Judicial Yuan upon an application by the interested person for such an interpretation, a ground for filing a retrial or an extraordinary appeal with respect to such final and irrevocable judgment then arises. It is expressly stipulated in the Code of Civil Procedure, the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Administrative Proceedings act and further interpreted by Interpretations No. 135 and 177 of this Judicial Yuan that if the application of laws in rendering a final and irrevocable judgment is manifestly erroneous or unlawful, the aggrieved party is entitled to file for retrial, extraordinary appeal or other legally prescribed remedy. Therefore, based upon the Interpretation by this Judicial Yuan, the party aggrieved by a judgment is entitled to seek retrial or other legally prescribed remedy after the publication of said Interpretation.

  Precedent P.T. No.610 (Ad. Ct., 1973) states that, "Article 24 of the Administrative Proceedings act provides that a party is entitled to file for a trial with respect to the judgment rendered by this Yuan if any of the circumstances listed under Items of Article 496 of the Code of Civil Procedure exists. However, the so-called 'clearly erroneous in the application of law' as referred to in Article 496, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 1, of the Code of Civil Procedure refers to the situation where the laws applied in the rendition of the judgment in question are contrary to the prevailing laws which should have been applied to the instant case or contrary to the interpretations or prior precedents. As for differences in legal interpretations, even if the plaintiff for retrial presents argument thereto, it still cannot be regarded as a case of being clearly erroneous in the application of law based on which a trial should be granted." If the laws or prior precedents applied in rendering a final and irrevocable judgment are found to be contrary to the Constitution pursuant to an interpretation by this Judicial Yuan upon an application for such an interpretation, then following from the discussion above, there automatically arises ground for a retrial or an extraordinary appeal with respect to such final and irrevocable judgment. The party aggrieved by such final and irrevocable judgment is entitled to file for a retrial on the ground of such interpretation. And the court may no longer argue that such interpretation amounts to differences in legal interpretations only and is not a case of being clearly erroneous in the application of law and thus proceed without applying the interpretation. As such, any part of the said Precedent of the Administrative Court contrary to this Interpretation shall cease to apply.

Translated by WELLINGTON L. KOO, and Formosa Transnational Attorneys at Law.
 

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