The diversity of actors in building construction and the complexity of subcontracting cannot accurately reflect the main identity of VARC`s crimes. These factors have led to professional technical personnel in the construction industry being unfairly responsible. The main reason was the inadequacy of the current construction management system. Basically, the obstacle to amending Article 193 of the Taiwanese Penal Code to current social conditions remains a problem. If a license is leased and the event involves the failure to conduct a safety assessment on the forest and not to take preventive measures or improvements: This rule confirms the above reasoning regarding unqualified technical professionals of construction projects. If they carry out related construction activities, but during the demolition or construction of the building or during the 10-year claim period, do not conduct a general structural safety assessment, do not take preventive measures or improvements, and cause a state of public danger, the likelihood of obtaining a VERC judgment is high. If structural safety defects in the quality of construction are detected, the level of public danger reaches the collapse of the house or neighboring houses with victims and the penalty (months) > 24: This rule corresponds to the above justification in cases where the persons responsible for the construction projects put the building itself or neighboring buildings in a state of public danger by tipping over or collapsing, and also cause losses. You will be charged with negligent conduct that causes the death of another person in the course of commercial activities. It confirms that Taiwanese courts have adopted the protected legal interests of life or physical well-being as a criterion for establishing negligent conduct in business operations in the context of the diligence of professional technical personnel of construction projects. VERC in Taiwan focuses on intentional acts and does not focus on acts of negligence. With respect to commercial negligence, the elements of the law must be a commercial act, and a VERC violation refers to a specific violation of architectural technology or technical rules in the performance of construction work. The criterion of both acts is therefore reflected in commercial transactions and the size of undertakings in the construction sector must therefore be clarified.
The actor is a person who does business in VERC and commercial negligence cases. The risks arise from commercial activities and are not permitted by law. However, the legal interests protected are different regardless of subjective intent, actor or act. This study therefore compiled Comparative Table 1 to explain the responsibilities of professional technical staff for buildings and the relationship between them in this research. J. NORMAN STARK is a lawyer, architect emeritus (AIA, NCARB), admitted to practice before the Ohio Bar, the Ohio District Courts, the United States Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court. He has over 40 years of construction and consulting experience in the field of construction accidents and disputes. He has professional experience in commercial and personal legal claims, real estate, public and private construction, litigation, arbitration, mediation and expert witness services. Its office is located in Cleveland, Ohio. With regard to the liability of American and Japanese technical personnel, many studies have focused on the study of civil and tort contractual liability (Tatum, 1983; Dobbin, 2007). Although there is no specific chapter in the United States and Japan codes on the criminal liability of construction industry professionals, they have established provisions on criminal liability for causing danger to public order.
With respect to administrative liability, if an architect is engaged to carry out transactions and intentionally commits VERCs that cause victims, the court can charge the architect with murder. In cases of gross negligence, offenders are also liable for criminal negligence for bodily harm or manslaughter (ANSI, 1995). In fact, the roles of architects and professional technical staff in the United States and Japan are primarily to prepare and integrate business operations by various professional technical staff in the planning and design phase of construction projects. The determination of liability and the extent of liability are based entirely on facts and contractual obligations, and most civil liabilities are bound by the Civil Code (including administrative liability and civil liability), with the exception of public emergencies caused by the active actions of architects and professional technical staff, that can be prosecuted. Together, lawyers and planning and engineering experts can develop clear, comprehensive and legally compliant technical specifications and scope of work. Table 2. Type of VERC judgment in the construction industry in Taiwan, 1996-2019 However, the interpretation of the term “supervisor” in some courts refers to persons responsible for supervising construction workers in the performance of construction work in accordance with the civil engineering regulations referred to in Article 15 of the Construction Code. Therefore, supervisors should be considered professional technical personnel within a construction company. These are usually professional technical personnel of construction projects responsible for certification, and they are employees of construction companies, but not architects.
The complex set of rules that can give rise to claims at any stage of the construction process includes: construction design, costs, tenders, contracts, awards, payment, contract interpretation, methods, subcontracting issues; Causes of action and liability in contract, negligence, performance and any other legal theory. Claims may also include insurance and performance, build quality, safety and protection. Early dispute resolution can avoid costly arbitration, mediation or litigation. Table 7 shows that in most VERC disputes in Taiwan, common patterns of negligent behavior causing the death of another person in business operations, VERC`s failure to conduct a safety assessment of the overall structure, and the failure to take preventive measures or improve the process, which accounted for 31.27% and 32.73% of these criminal cases respectively. respectively. Cases in which the responsibility as contractually agreed construction manager has not been assumed in the contract construction are often attributed to the person in charge of the development company, the person in charge of the construction company and the technical staff responsible for the construction. Two architects were found guilty of failing to fulfill their responsibilities as construction managers when they were responsible for planning and supervising construction. In addition, an architect was found guilty of admitting to such a breach under a simplified criminal penalty. First, German scholars believe that the legal interests protected by this article are people`s lives and bodies, not property. Second, the German Penal Code does not contain direct provisions on the designation of actors involved in VERCs as in Taiwan (e.g. “contractors, site managers or planners”).
Instead, it uses “action time” (design, instruction, construction, or demolition) to determine the main actor. In addition, Taiwan`s VERC regulations indicate “public dangers” regarding the outcome of acts, while the German Penal Code provides a refined explanation, including “endangering the life or limb or any other person.” The “other person” indicated includes not only residents and passing pedestrians, but also construction personnel and not the actor himself. In addition, the German Criminal Code specifies that such acts include both “violation of generally recognised technical standards” and “violation of generally recognised technical standards for the incorporation of technical equipment into a building or the modification of such equipment”. “Generally accepted rules of technology” in Germany can be understood as the concept of generally accepted engineering standards and their importance for architecture and constitute one of the most important technical standards in German law. The technical standards of these laws define the quality of craftsmen, contractors or architects who provide services to clients (Buss 2002). However, there is little literature on the causes and effects of litigation related to the functions and facts of the VERC in building security and judicial decision-making mechanisms. Based on preliminary statistics from this work, vague limitations of legal commercial actions and professional liability of construction professionals, and inconsistencies between intentional acts in VERC and commercial negligence in the Criminal Code, only 8.61% of detected criminals were convicted of VARC crimes. The low confirmation rate of VERC also suggests that there is a need for more in-depth discussions on VERC issues. Under such conditions, this study believes that the most effective way to prevent VERC and improve construction management standards is to use modern information technologies and statistical methods to identify some important links between related factors in large amounts of complex VERC data.
