Article 7 of the Administrative Procedure Law provides: "in case of administrative lawsuits, the claim for damages or other property payments may be combined in the same proceeding." In this regard, the Taipei High Administrative Court rendered the 103-Su-233 Decision of August 20, 2014 (hereinafter, the "Decision"), holding that the court may review a party's claim for combined damages or other property payments asserted in accordance with Article 7 of the Administrative Procedure Law only when the administrative lawsuit which forms the basis for such combination has been substantively reviewed by the administrative court and won.
In the facts underlying the Decision, Individual A had an illegally constructed housing unit in a certain place and agreed that he would receive a compensation for relocation after being relocated during the period announced by the competent authority and was willing to pay the full amount of the price of a housing unit (86 m2). However, when the Ministry of National Defense subsequently submitted information for the purpose of creating a table that summarizes the willingness for reconstruction and the size demands among the original military households and illegal households, Individual A was not included. Individual A supplemented the application, but the design and planning for the reconstruction base had been completed. Therefore, Individual A's demand for purchasing the 86 m2 housing unit could not be included in the plan. In addition, since the placement of original military households is conducted under the concept that the same batch of households should be included in the same project, Individual A could not be allowed to purchase the housing unit, either. Dissatisfied, Individual filed administrative appeal, which set aside such disposition. However, another disposition was rendered to deny Individual A's request. Not satisfied that the administrative appeal was not successful, Individual A filed this administrative lawsuit.
According to the Decision, the Statute for the Reconstruction of Old Military Villages does not grant illegal households any public law right to request placement. The administrative agency took special preferential measures to compensate illegal householders to avoid wasting judicial resources and saving costs. Moreover, since Individual A's purchase of such 86 m2 housing unit was no longer feasible in reality, it was held that Individual A's request was rightfully rejected by the original disposition.
In this matter, Individual A requested an administrative disposition to be rendered while seeking to combine damages in accordance with Article 7 of the Administrative Procedure. According to the Decision,since the combined damages in an administrative lawsuit are preconditioned by the fact that another administrative lawsuit should be filed, such other administrative lawsuit should be lawful. In addition, claims for damages and other property payments may be combined in order to avoid conflicts between two rulings with causal relationship or to prevent redundant lawsuits. Therefore, when a party asserts any claim to make such combination in accordance with Article 7 of the Administrative Procedure Law, the administrative lawsuit which forms the basis of such combination should be substantively reviewed by the administrative court and won before the administrative court may conduct substantive review of such claim of the party under Article 7 of the Administrative Procedure Law and render a decision in favor of such party. In this case, since Individual A's claims to set aside the original decision and decision on administrative appeal and to render an administrative disposition were both groundless, the claim for combined damages asserted in accordance with Article 7 of the Administrative Procedure Law should also be rejected.