{"id":119688,"date":"2025-11-12T14:26:34","date_gmt":"2025-11-12T14:26:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/?post_type=comparative_guide&#038;p=119688"},"modified":"2025-11-12T14:41:57","modified_gmt":"2025-11-12T14:41:57","slug":"taiwan-international-arbitration","status":"publish","type":"comparative_guide","link":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/chapter\/taiwan-international-arbitration\/","title":{"rendered":"Taiwan: International Arbitration"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"template":"","class_list":["post-119688","comparative_guide","type-comparative_guide","status-publish","hentry","guides-international-arbitration","jurisdictions-taiwan"],"acf":[],"appp":{"post_list":{"below_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">Formosa Transnational Attorneys at Law<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2019\/12\/formosa_logo.jpg\"\/><\/span><\/div>"},"post_detail":{"above_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">Formosa Transnational Attorneys at Law<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2019\/12\/formosa_logo.jpg\"\/><\/span><\/div>","below_title":"<span class=\"guide-intro\">This country specific Q&amp;A provides an overview of International Arbitration laws and regulations applicable in Taiwan<\/span><div class=\"guide-content\"><div class=\"filter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t<input type=\"text\" placeholder=\"Search questions and answers...\" class=\"filter-container__search-field\">\r\n\t\t\t<\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<ol class=\"custom-counter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What legislation applies to arbitration in your country? Are there any mandatory laws?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Taiwan\u2019s Arbitration Act is the national legislation that governs arbitration in Taiwan. The Arbitration Act was enacted based on the UNCITRAL Model Law of 1985 and the Regulation Governing Organization, Mediation Procedures and Fees of Arbitration Institution of 1999, and regulates arbitration agreements, the composition of arbitral tribunals, arbitration proceedings, the enforcement of arbitral awards, the revocation of arbitral awards, settlement and mediation, and foreign arbitral awards. The Arbitration Act governs international and domestic arbitrations as a unitary system rather than creating separate regimes distinguishing between them.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is your country a signatory to the New York Convention? Are there any reservations to the general obligations of the Convention?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Taiwan is currently not a contracting state to the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the \u201cConvention\u201d). Nevertheless, its Arbitration Act is designed to align with the Convention. This is to ensure that Taiwan has an arbitration system that meets international standards and produces arbitral awards that can be enforced domestically and internationally.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What other arbitration-related treaties and conventions is your country a party to?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Taiwan is currently neither a contracting state to the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, nor any other arbitration-related treaties and conventions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is the law governing international arbitration in your country based on the UNCITRAL Model Law? Are there significant differences between the two? Are there any impending plans to reform the arbitration laws in your country?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Taiwan\u2019s Arbitration Act is based on the UNCITRAL Model Law of 1985 and the Regulation Governing Organization, Mediation Procedures and Fees of Arbitration Institution of 1999.<\/p>\n<p>Whereas the Arbitration Act was enacted on the basis of the 1985 UNCITRAL Model Law, and as the UNCITRAL Model Law was substantially amended in 2006, the Arbitration Act now differs from the 2006 UNCITRAL Model Law in the following respects:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Arbitration Procedure: If the parties do not expressly agree on the rules for the arbitration procedure, Article 19 of the Arbitration Act specifies that the arbitral tribunal shall apply the Arbitration Act, and where that Act is silent, the tribunal shall adopt the rules of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure mutatis mutandis, or other rules of procedure that the tribunal deems proper. Article 52 of the Arbitration Act provides that a court hearing an arbitration dispute shall apply the Taiwan Non-contentious Matters Law in addition to the Arbitration Act. If the Taiwan court does not find any relevant provisions in either of these two laws, it is required to apply the Code of Civil Procedure mutatis mutandis. The UNCITRAL Model Law of 2006 has no similar provisions regarding applicable arbitration procedures.<\/li>\n<li>Time Constraints on Notice and Arbitral Decision: Article 21 Paragraph 1 of the Arbitration Act requires the arbitral tribunal to decide the venue and date of hearing and to notify the parties within ten days of receipt of notice of the appointment. This Article further provides that the arbitral tribunal should render an award within six months of the commencement of such arbitration, although one three-month extension is permitted when necessary. The UNCITRAL Model Law of 2006 has no similar provisions controlling the time of notification and arbitral decision.<\/li>\n<li>Interim Measures: Article 39 Paragraph 1 of the Arbitration Act merely permits the parties to apply to the court for provisional remedies pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure, but the Arbitration Act does not grant the arbitral tribunal the power to provide interim relief directly to the parties. Nonetheless, Article 28 Paragraph 1 of the Arbitration Act provides that the arbitral tribunal can request necessary assistance from a court or other agencies when it conducts arbitration. In contrast, Article 9 of the UNCITRAL Model Law of 2006 provides that an arbitral tribunal can grant interim measures or a preliminary order to the parties.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What arbitral institutions (if any) exist in your country? When were their rules last amended? Are any amendments being considered?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There are several arbitral institutions in Taiwan. Some arbitral institutions provide a comprehensive arbitration service across multiple industries (eg, the CAA and the Taiwan Arbitration Association), and others specialize in specific industries (eg, the Chinese Construction Industry Arbitration Association (CCIAA) for construction, the Chinese Real Estate Arbitration Association for real estate, and the Taiwan Assessment and Evaluation Association for sports).<\/p>\n<p>The CAA is one of the most reliable arbitral institutions in Taiwan. In 2018, the CAA opened its first offshore branch in Hong Kong. This was in part a response to the fact that Taiwan is not a contracting state to the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and also in part an effort to serve the increasing need for international arbitration. The branch\u2019s official name is the CAA International Arbitration Centre (CAAI). This dual-track system means that parties can choose the CAA as the arbitral institution if the arbitration is seated in Taiwan and the CAAI if the arbitration is seated outside Taiwan.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is there a specialist arbitration court in your country?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>While Taiwan has a special court with jurisdiction over intellectual property and significant commercial disputes, no specific courts are designated to hear disputes relating to international or domestic arbitrations. Any such disputes are heard by courts of general jurisdiction.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the validity requirements for an arbitration agreement under the laws of your country?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Pursuant to Article 1 Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Arbitration Act, an arbitration agreement <strong>must be in writing<\/strong> to be enforceable. The writing requirement can be met by any written document, documentary instrument, correspondence, facsimile, telegram, or other similar type of communication between the parties that is sufficient to show the existence of a prima facie arbitration agreement.<\/p>\n<p>When considering a petition for enforcement of an arbitration agreement, pursuant to Article 1 Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Arbitration Act, <strong>the court is likely to check first whether the arbitration agreement meets the writing requirement.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are arbitration clauses considered separable from the main contract?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Article 3 of the Arbitration Act provides for the severability of an arbitration clause from a principal agreement. The validity of an arbitration clause that forms part of a principal agreement is determined separately from the rest of the principal agreement. The validity of the arbitration clause is not affected by the nullity, invalidity, revocation, rescission or termination of other parts of the principal agreement.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Do the courts of your country apply a validation principle under which an arbitration agreement should be considered valid and enforceable if it would be so considered under at least one of the national laws potentially applicable to it?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In Taiwan, the validity of an arbitration clause is a matter to be examined by the court ex officio when a party petitions to set aside an arbitral award. Apart from the statutory requirement under the Arbitration Act that an arbitration agreement be in writing, the courts generally adopt a more liberal and good-faith interpretative approach. In case of doubt, preference is given to upholding validity (in dubio pro arbitrato). In other words, Taiwan\u2019s courts tend to reject strict construction or the principle of contra proferentem. Thus, where the wording of the disputed clause admits of multiple interpretations, the principle is to favor the interpretation that renders the arbitration agreement valid, thereby recognizing the existence of a valid arbitration agreement between the parties.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are asymmetric arbitration clauses \u2013 for instance, where one party has the right to choose between arbitration or litigation while the other party does not have this option \u2013 valid in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Arbitration Act currently lacks provisions regarding multi-party or multi-contract arbitration. Taiwan\u2019s courts and arbitrators have thus far not formed stable views on these issues.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In what instances can third parties or non-signatories be bound by an arbitration agreement? Are there any recent court decisions on these issues?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Arbitration Act does not provide that the arbitral tribunal can assume jurisdiction over a party other than the contracting parties of the arbitration agreement. The jurisdiction of arbitration, in principle, attaches only to the arbitration agreement\u2019s contracting parties. However, there are exceptions in practice that may extend the jurisdiction of arbitration and the effect of the arbitral award to a third party.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>A Third Party Succeeds to the Arbitration Agreement: Firstly, if a third party succeeds to the rights and obligations of the arbitration agreement (whether in the form of an arbitration clause within a principal agreement or a separate arbitration agreement) by assignment, inheritance, insolvency administration, subrogation or any other statutory means, the succeeding party shall bear the rights and obligations of such arbitration so that the jurisdiction of such arbitration and the effect of the arbitral awards may be extended to the succeeding party. Please note that, under these circumstances, the key issues in the jurisdiction of arbitration are whether the third party has succeeded to the arbitration agreement and whether the succeeded arbitration agreement covers the subject matter at issue.<\/li>\n<li>Third-Party Intervention: Secondly, a third party may intervene in arbitration proceedings. Pursuant to Article 19 of the Arbitration Act, if the Arbitration Act is silent on a matter, the arbitral tribunal may apply the Code of Civil Procedure mutatis mutandis or other rules of procedure that it deems proper. The legal practice in Taiwan based on this provision is to adopt the rules for third-party intervention prescribed in Articles 58 to 67-1 of the Code of Civil Procedure mutatis mutandis to the arbitration. To be more specific, if the third party has a legal interest in the subject matter of the arbitration, it may request the arbitral tribunal to permit it to intervene in the arbitration as an intervener. If approved to intervene, the third party shall intervene in the procedure of the arbitration accordingly and shall be bound by the arbitral award. This practice has been recognized in actual cases by the Supreme Court.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any recent court decisions in your country concerning the choice of law applicable to an arbitration agreement where no such law has been specified by the Parties?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Where the parties have not expressly designated the governing law of the arbitration agreement, Article 3 of the Arbitration Act \u2014 which requires such agreements to be made in writing \u2014 excludes the possibility of implying a choice of law between the parties. In such circumstances, the applicable law is determined under Taiwan\u2019s Act Governing the Choice of Law in Civil Matters Involving Foreign Elements. For example, Article 20 provides that the law most closely connected to the case shall apply. There have, however, been no particularly notable recent judicial precedents on this issue.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How is the law applicable to the substance determined? Is there a specific set of choice of law rules in your country?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Where the parties have expressly agreed in writing, the governing law shall be the law so designated by the parties. In the absence of such an agreement, the applicable law is determined in accordance with Article 20 of the\u202fAct Governing the Choice of Law in Civil Matters Involving Foreign Elements. Article 20 provides that the law most closely connected to the juridical act shall apply. Certain presumptions often determine which law is most closely connected. These presumptions include, in the case of immovable property, the law of its location.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In your country, are there any particular requirements for and\/or restrictions in the appointment of arbitrators?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Arbitration Act sets forth the qualifications of arbitrators, but it does not further restrict the parties\u2019 autonomy to select arbitrators. Parties can agree on the appointment of arbitrators, the method of appointment, and any special qualifications for the arbitrators.<\/p>\n<p>The Arbitration Act sets forth the qualifications of arbitrators in Articles 5 to 8. Arbitrators must be individuals. Pursuant to Article 6 of the Arbitration Act, professionals who have legal and other knowledge or experience, a reputation for integrity and impartiality, and have one of the following qualifications can serve as arbitrators:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Having served as a judge or public prosecutor;<\/li>\n<li>Having practiced for more than five years as a lawyer, accountant, architect or engineer or in any other commerce-related profession;<\/li>\n<li>Having acted as an arbitrator of a domestic or foreign arbitration institution;<\/li>\n<li>Having taught as an assistant professor or higher in a domestic or foreign university or college accredited by the Ministry of Education; or<\/li>\n<li>Being a specialist in a particular field or profession and having practiced for more than five years.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>In addition to the aforementioned qualifications, Article 8 of the Arbitration Act requires professionals to receive training and obtain a certificate before applying to an arbitration institution for registration as an arbitrator unless they have one of the following qualifications:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Having served as a sitting judge or prosecutor;<\/li>\n<li>Having practiced as a lawyer for more than three years;<\/li>\n<li>Having taught at the law school of a domestic or foreign university or college accredited by the Ministry of Education as a professor for two years, or as an associate professor for three years, as well as having taught major legal courses for not less than three years; or<\/li>\n<li>Having been registered as an arbitrator in any arbitration institution prior to the effectiveness of the 2002 amendment of the Arbitration Act, and acted in practice as an arbitrator in a dispute.<\/li>\n<li>The aforementioned requirements are not applied in ad hoc arbitrations.<\/li>\n<li>Article 7 of the Arbitration Act prescribes the conditions for the disqualification of an arbitrator. A person cannot act as an arbitrator:<\/li>\n<li>Where the person has been convicted of a criminal offense for corruption or malfeasance;<\/li>\n<li>Where the person has been convicted of any offense other than those in the preceding category and sentenced to serve a prison term of one year or more;<\/li>\n<li>Where the person has been deprived of public rights, and the period of deprivation has not expired;<\/li>\n<li>Where the person has been declared bankrupt and has not recovered his or her property rights;<\/li>\n<li>Where the person has become subject to a guardianship order and the order has not been canceled; or<\/li>\n<li>Where the person is a minor (ie, under the age of 18).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Can the local courts intervene in the selection of arbitrators? If so, how?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Generally speaking, the courts respect party autonomy and will not intervene in the selection of arbitrator(s). However, the court may appoint arbitrator(s) upon a party\u2019s request in the following situations:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Inaction or Delay of the Parties or the Arbitration Institution<\/li>\n<li>Pursuant to Article 12 of the Arbitration Act, if one party or the chosen arbitration institution does not appoint an arbitrator within the designated period, the other party can apply to the court to appoint the arbitrator.<\/li>\n<li>Inability of Arbitrators to Duly Perform Arbitration<\/li>\n<li>Pursuant to Article 13 of the Arbitration Act, in the event that the arbitrator agreed to by the parties cannot perform the arbitration as a result of death or any other cause, or because the arbitrator refuses to conduct the arbitration or unreasonably delays the arbitration, the parties may agree to replace the arbitrator. If the parties cannot reach an agreement on a replacement, the court may, upon a party\u2019s request, appoint a new arbitrator. If the arbitrator appointed by one party cannot duly perform the arbitration for one of the aforementioned reasons, the other party may request such party to appoint another arbitrator within 14 days of receipt of such request. If the obliged party fails to do so, the requesting party may apply to the court to appoint a new arbitrator.<\/li>\n<li>Court May Appoint the Arbitrator Upon the Parties\u2019 Request or of Its Own Volition<\/li>\n<li>If the arbitrator appointed by the arbitration institution or the presiding arbitrator cannot hear the arbitration pursuant to Article 13 Paragraph 1 of the Arbitration Act (death, refusal or undue delay), the court may, upon the parties\u2019 request or of its own volition, appoint a new arbitrator or a new presiding arbitrator.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Can the appointment of an arbitrator be challenged? What are the grounds for such a challenge? What is the procedure for such a challenge?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Pursuant to Articles 16 and 17 of the Arbitration Act, if an arbitrator does not possess the qualifications agreed by the parties, or if one of the statutory circumstances prescribed in Article 15 Paragraph 2 applies to the arbitrator (ie, a conflict of interest), the parties may file a request in writing to the arbitral tribunal for withdrawal of such arbitrator within 14 days of their knowledge of the basis for such withdrawal. The arbitral tribunal shall decide on the withdrawal within ten days.<\/p>\n<p>Article 15 Paragraph 1 of the Arbitration Act prescribes that arbitrators have obligations of independence, impartiality and confidentiality. Moreover, Paragraph 2 of the same Article lists the circumstances in which an arbitrator is required to immediately disclose the details thereof to the parties:<\/p>\n<p>the existence of any of the causes that, mutatis mutandis, would require a judge to withdraw from a judicial proceeding in accordance with Article 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure;<\/p>\n<p>the existence or history of an employment or agency relationship between the arbitrator and a party;<\/p>\n<p>the existence or history of an employment or agency relationship between the arbitrator and an agent of a party or between the arbitrator and a key witness; or<\/p>\n<p>the existence of any other circumstances which raise any justifiable doubts as to the impartiality or independence of the arbitrator.<\/p>\n<p>These circumstances may create conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest between the arbitrator and the parties, or they may raise justifiable doubts as to the impartiality or independence of the arbitrator. Pursuant to Articles 16 and 17 of the Arbitration Act, if one of these situations applies to an arbitrator, the parties can request the arbitral tribunal to remove the arbitrator.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have there been any recent developments concerning the duty of independence and impartiality of the arbitrators, including the duty of disclosure?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The requirements for independence and impartiality of arbitrators are centered on Articles 15 and 40 of the Arbitration Act. Under Article 15, an arbitrator is obliged to disclose any circumstance that may give rise to doubts as to his or her independence or impartiality, including grounds for recusal under the Code of Civil Procedure, or any employment or agency relationship with a party or its representative. However, a mere failure to disclose does not automatically constitute grounds for setting aside an award. Pursuant to Article 40, Paragraph 1, Item 5, the non-disclosure must be sufficiently serious to affect the outcome of the arbitration. In practice, a 2012 Supreme Court judgment has emphasized that a violation of the disclosure obligation does not, by itself, establish bias or justify setting aside an award; rather, it is necessary to assess whether the undisclosed matter constitutes a serious ground for recusal capable of altering the result of the arbitration.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are arbitrators immune from liability?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There are no provisions in the Arbitration Act granting arbitrators immunity from civil or criminal liability.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is the principle of competence-competence recognized in your country?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Taiwan recognizes the principle of competence-competence. Article 22 of the Arbitration Act prescribes that the arbitral tribunal shall decide an objection raised by a party as to the scope of such arbitral tribunal\u2019s authority. That is to say, the arbitral tribunal can rule on the existence of the arbitration agreement, the validity of the arbitration agreement, and whether the dispute is within the scope of the arbitration agreement. By deciding these issues, the arbitral tribunal decides competence issues itself.<\/p>\n<p>In practice, the Supreme Court and the Taiwan High Court have mentioned this issue in the rationale of judgments on actions to set aside arbitral awards. It can be inferred from the rationale of these judgments that the courts recognize that the arbitral tribunal can determine for itself whether it has competence with respect to the dispute.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the approach of local courts towards a party commencing litigation in apparent breach of an arbitration agreement?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Pursuant to Article 4 Paragraph 1 of the Arbitration Act, if a party breaches the arbitration agreement or clause and directly files litigation in the court, the court shall, upon application by the adverse party, suspend the litigation and order the plaintiff to submit to arbitration within a specified time, unless the defendant proceeds to respond to the legal action. Pursuant to Paragraph 2 of the same Article, if the plaintiff does not submit to arbitration within the designated period, the court shall dismiss such litigation. Pursuant to Paragraph 3 of the same Article, if the arbitral award is rendered after the suspension of the litigation, such litigation shall be regarded as withdrawn as of the date on which the arbitral award was rendered.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What happens when a respondent fails to participate in the arbitration? Can the local courts compel participation?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There is no provision in the Arbitration Act that allows the court to compel the respondent to participate in the arbitration. In such circumstances, the arbitral tribunal may, pursuant to Article 19 of the Arbitration Act and by reference to Article 385 of the Code of Civil Procedure, enter a default award based on the appearing party&#8217;s arguments. Similarly, where the respondent fails to appear even after a second notice, the tribunal itself may, ex officio, hold an ex parte hearing and issue its decision accordingly.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Can third parties voluntarily join arbitration proceedings? If all parties agree to the intervention, is the tribunal bound by this agreement? If all parties do not agree to the intervention, can the tribunal allow for it?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Pursuant to Article 19 of the Arbitration Act, if the Arbitration Act is silent on a matter, the arbitral tribunal may apply the Code of Civil Procedure mutatis mutandis or other rules of procedure that it deems proper. The legal practice in Taiwan based on this provision is to adopt the rules for third-party intervention prescribed in Articles 58 to 67-1 of the Code of Civil Procedure mutatis mutandis to the arbitration. To be more specific, if the third party has a legal interest in the subject matter of the arbitration, it may request the arbitral tribunal to permit it to intervene in the arbitration as an intervener. If approved to intervene, the third party shall intervene in the procedure of the arbitration accordingly and shall be bound by the arbitral award. This practice has been recognized in actual cases by the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What interim measures are available? Will local courts issue interim measures pending the constitution of the tribunal? Are anti-suit and\/or anti-arbitration injunctions available and enforceable in your country?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Article 39 Paragraph 1 of the Arbitration Act merely permits the parties to apply to the court for provisional remedies pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure, but the Arbitration Act does not grant the arbitral tribunal the power to provide interim relief directly to the parties.<\/p>\n<p>The Arbitration Act does not expressly provide that an arbitral tribunal in Taiwan can grant interim or preliminary relief, but there are corresponding or similar provisions in the Arbitration Rules of the CAA, the CAAI and the CCIAA.<\/p>\n<p>The Arbitration Rules of the CAA and CCIAA adopt a concise regime for this issue. Pursuant to Article 36 Paragraph 1 of the CAA Arbitration Rules and Article 43 of the CCIAA Arbitration Rules, the arbitral tribunal may, at the request of either party, take any interim measures as agreed by the parties in respect to the subject matter of the dispute for purposes of preserving perishable goods or providing immediate protection, such as ordering their sale, custody by third party, or other interim measures deemed necessary. Paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the CAA Arbitration Rules further prescribes that, in the aforementioned circumstances, the arbitral tribunal may record the terms of settlement pursuant to Article 44 of the Arbitration Act and order the claimant to make advance payment for carrying out the measures.<\/p>\n<p>Harmonised with the UNCITRAL Model Law of 2006, the Arbitration Rules of the CAAI regulate this issue with more comprehensive norms. Pursuant to Article 26 of the CAAI Arbitration Rules:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The parties may apply to an emergency arbitrator for emergency measures before the arbitral tribunal\u2019s constitution.<\/li>\n<li>The parties may apply to the arbitral tribunal for interim measures for the conduct prescribed in Paragraph 3 of the same Article (such as maintaining or restoring the status quo, taking action to prevent or refraining from taking action likely to cause harm or prejudice to the arbitral process, and so on) and the arbitral tribunal may grant interim measures in any form before the final arbitral award is rendered.<\/li>\n<li>The arbitral tribunal may require the requesting party to provide appropriate security in connection with the measures.<\/li>\n<li>The arbitral tribunal may modify, suspend or terminate any measure it has granted upon any party\u2019s request, or on the arbitral tribunal\u2019s own initiative with advance notice to the parties in exceptional circumstances.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Regarding the role of the courts for interim and preliminary measures in the arbitration, Article 39 Paragraph 1 of the Arbitration Act approves party applications to the court for interim relief pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure. Moreover, Article 28 Paragraph 1 of the Arbitration Act prescribes that the arbitral tribunal can request necessary assistance from a court or other agencies in the course of arbitration. If the applicable arbitration rule does not regulate the preservation of evidence, the party may use Article 19 of the Arbitration Act and Article 368 of the Code of Civil Procedure to apply to the courts to grant interim and preliminary measures.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there particular rules governing evidentiary matters in arbitration? Will the local courts in your jurisdiction play any role in the obtaining of evidence? Can local courts compel witnesses to participate in arbitration proceedings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The parties to an arbitration have the discretion to agree upon procedural rules, including the rules for the collection and submission of evidence. In the absence of agreed rules of evidence, the tribunal will generally follow the rules of evidence stipulated in the Code of Civil Procedure. Under the Code of Civil Procedure, each party is generally responsible for collecting and submitting its evidence to the court\/tribunal before the final oral hearing.<\/p>\n<p>The Arbitration Act permits the parties to decide on their preferred arbitration procedures. Their agreement on procedure may govern what rules of evidence apply. In practice, the CAA Arbitration Rules are most commonly adopted. Article 24 of the CAA Arbitration Rules states that the parties shall make submissions on facts and laws, and present relevant evidence to the tribunal. The parties are also required to respond and answer to submissions and evidence presented by the other party. Pursuant to Article 27, a party can submit an application to allow witnesses or expert witnesses to testify at the hearings. It is also common in some of the arbitration proceedings to adopt the IBA Rules on the Taking of the Evidence in International Arbitration.<\/p>\n<p>The Arbitration Act provides that an arbitral tribunal has the power to summon witnesses or expert witnesses to appear for questioning. However, the tribunal does not have the power to compel a witness to appear or a party to produce evidence. Nonetheless the tribunal may apply for a court order to compel a witness to appear and petition the court to authorise the tribunal to exercise the power of investigation under Article 28 of the Arbitration Act.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What ethical codes and other professional standards, if any, apply to counsel and arbitrators conducting proceedings in your country? Do these codes and professional standards apply only to counsel and arbitrators having the nationality of your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Arbitration Act provides basic requirements for arbitrator qualification addressing their character, finances, criminal records, conflicts of interest, and age. If the arbitrating parties adopt the CAA Arbitration Rules for their arbitration, party counsel and arbitrators are bound by the CAA Code of Ethics for Arbitrators.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In your country, are there any rules with respect to the confidentiality of arbitration proceedings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Pursuant to Article 23 of the Arbitration Act, arbitral proceedings are confidential. Each arbitrator has a duty to maintain confidentiality. The arbitral proceedings shall not be made public, unless the parties have agreed otherwise.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How are the costs of arbitration proceedings estimated and allocated? Can pre- and post-award interest be included on the principal claim and costs incurred?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Taiwan\u2019s related laws and regulations merely stipulate that the allocation of the arbitration costs shall be ordered in the decision set out in an arbitration award. There is an exception: a party that withdraws an arbitration application shall bear all arbitration costs. Nonetheless, Taiwanese law does not provide for a specific method of allocating costs other than in withdrawals. In practice, the arbitrators tend to adopt the methods used to allocate court costs in civil litigation under Taiwan\u2019s Code of Civil Procedure. Under the Code, the losing party generally bears the costs pro rata.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"TextRun SCXW97670494 BCX8\" lang=\"EN-GB\" xml:lang=\"EN-GB\" data-contrast=\"auto\"><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW97670494 BCX8\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"wText\" data-ccp-parastyle-defn=\"{&quot;ObjectId&quot;:&quot;5aff61d3-d427-5897-a576-fedee8c2103c|1&quot;,&quot;ClassId&quot;:1073872969,&quot;Properties&quot;:[469777841,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,469777842,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,469777843,&quot;MS Mincho&quot;,469777844,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,469769226,&quot;Times New Roman,MS Mincho&quot;,335551547,&quot;1036&quot;,335559740,&quot;240&quot;,201341983,&quot;0&quot;,335559739,&quot;180&quot;,201342446,&quot;1&quot;,201342447,&quot;5&quot;,201342449,&quot;1&quot;,201341986,&quot;1&quot;,268442635,&quot;22&quot;,469775450,&quot;wText&quot;,201340122,&quot;2&quot;,134234082,&quot;true&quot;,134233614,&quot;true&quot;,469778129,&quot;wText&quot;,335572020,&quot;1&quot;,335551550,&quot;6&quot;,335551620,&quot;6&quot;,469777929,&quot;wText Char&quot;,469778324,&quot;Normal&quot;]}\" data-ccp-parastyle-linked-defn=\"{&quot;ObjectId&quot;:&quot;265cde33-c292-5fde-8fee-3722d0400839|1&quot;,&quot;ClassId&quot;:1073872969,&quot;Properties&quot;:[201342446,&quot;1&quot;,201342447,&quot;5&quot;,201342449,&quot;1&quot;,469777841,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,469777842,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,469777843,&quot;MS Mincho&quot;,469777844,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,201341986,&quot;1&quot;,469769226,&quot;Times New Roman,MS Mincho&quot;,268442635,&quot;22&quot;,469775450,&quot;wText Char&quot;,201340122,&quot;1&quot;,134233614,&quot;true&quot;,469778129,&quot;wTextChar&quot;,335572020,&quot;1&quot;,134231262,&quot;true&quot;,469777929,&quot;wText&quot;,469778324,&quot;Default Paragraph Font&quot;]}\">Taiwan <\/span><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW97670494 BCX8\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"wText\">arbitration<\/span><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW97670494 BCX8\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"wText\"> law does not<\/span><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW97670494 BCX8\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"wText\"> specially prescribe<\/span><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW97670494 BCX8\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"wText\"> how interest should be handled<\/span><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW97670494 BCX8\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"wText\">. <\/span><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW97670494 BCX8\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"wText\">As a result<\/span><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW97670494 BCX8\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"wText\">, the Civil Code and Law of Bills will typically apply with respect to the awarding of interest if the governing law of the subject dispute is the Taiwan law.<\/span><\/span><span class=\"EOP SCXW97670494 BCX8\" data-ccp-props=\"{&quot;201341983&quot;:1,&quot;335551550&quot;:6,&quot;335551620&quot;:6,&quot;335559685&quot;:924,&quot;335559739&quot;:180,&quot;335559740&quot;:400}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How are applications for security for costs viewed in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Taiwan arbitration law does not specially prescribe how interest should be handled. As a result, the Civil Code and Law of Bills will typically apply with respect to the awarding of interest if the governing law of the subject dispute is the Taiwan law.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What legal requirements are there in your country for the recognition and enforcement of an award? Is there a requirement that the award be reasoned, i.e. substantiated and motivated?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>To enforce an arbitral award, the winning party must petition for and obtain a court order for the award to be enforced under Article 37 Paragraph 2 of the Arbitration Act.<\/p>\n<p>The requirements for an arbitral award are stipulated in Article 33 Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Arbitration Act. These requirements include: (1) identifying the parties, (2) identifying any interpreters involved, (3) setting out the main text of the award along with relevant facts and reasons unless the parties have agreed otherwise, (5) noting the date and place of the rendering of the award, and (6) having the original copy of the award signed by the arbitrator(s) who heard the dispute.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the estimated timeframe for the recognition and enforcement of an award (domestic and international)? Can a party bring a motion for the recognition and enforcement of an award on an ex parte basis? Would the standard of review be different for domestic and international awards?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The court will usually render a judgment after one or two hearings in cases where the opposing party does not object. One or two hearings are typically held over a few months. However, if the opposing party does object, the proceedings will follow the ordinary course of litigation, and the trial can take several years in some cases.<\/p>\n<p>After approving a petition to recognize and enforce an arbitral award, the court will send out notice to the opposing party. That is, the law requires notice and an opportunity for the opposing party to be heard.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Can arbitration awards be appealed or challenged in local courts? What are the grounds and procedure in this regard? Is it possible for parties to waive any rights of appeal or challenge to an award by agreement?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Parties are not allowed to appeal an award seated in Taiwan since the award is final and binding upon the parties to the arbitration proceedings. Nonetheless, an arbitral award may be set aside pursuant to Article 40 Paragraph 1 of the Arbitration Act. The grounds for setting aside an award are as follows:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The arbitral award concerns a dispute not contemplated by the terms of the arbitration agreement, or exceeds the scope of the arbitration agreement, unless the offending portion of the award may be severed and the severance will not affect the remainder of the award.<\/li>\n<li>The reasons for the arbitral award were not stated, as required, unless the omission has been corrected by the arbitral tribunal.<\/li>\n<li>The arbitral award directs a party to act contrary to the law.<\/li>\n<li>The arbitration agreement is null, invalid, or has yet to come into effect or became invalid prior to the conclusion of the arbitral proceedings.<\/li>\n<li>The arbitral tribunal fails to give any party an opportunity to present its case prior to the conclusion of the arbitral proceedings, or any party is not lawfully represented in the arbitral proceedings.<\/li>\n<li>The composition of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral proceedings is contrary to the arbitration agreement or the law.<\/li>\n<li>An arbitrator fails to fulfil the duty of disclosure prescribed in Article 15 Paragraph 2 of the Arbitration Act and appears to be partial or has been requested to withdraw but continues to participate, provided that the request for withdrawal has not been dismissed by the court.<\/li>\n<li>An arbitrator violates any duty in the entrusted arbitration and such violation carries criminal liability.<\/li>\n<li>A party or any representative has committed a criminal offence in relation to the arbitration.<\/li>\n<li>Any evidence or the content of any translation upon which the arbitration award relies has been forged or fraudulently altered or contains any other misrepresentations.<\/li>\n<li>A judgment of a criminal or civil matter, or an administrative ruling upon which the arbitration award relies, has been reversed or materially altered by a subsequent judgment or administrative ruling.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Please note that the set-aside procedure is subject to appeal and therefore may go up to the court of the third instance. Nonetheless, the Taiwan courts tend to review the grounds for setting aside quite narrowly.<\/p>\n<p>The Arbitration Act neither permits nor prohibits the parties from agreeing to exclude or expand the scope of appeal or challenge. There are no Taiwan judgments on this point though.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In what instances can third parties or non-signatories be bound by an award? To what extent might a third party challenge the recognition of an award?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>It is not stipulated in the Arbitration Act that the arbitral tribunal can assume jurisdiction over a party other than the contracting parties of the arbitration agreement. To assess whether a third party can be bound by an arbitration agreement or award, please refer to Question 12.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any rules \/ court decisions that regulate or prohibit third party funding of arbitration proceedings \u2013 for instance, where funding by an entity not involved in the dispute in return for a share of the eventual award may be barred \u2013 in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Currently, there are no relevant provisions with respect to third-party funding in the Arbitration Act. However, the Taiwanese legislature and academics are aware of the widespread global acceptance of third-party funding, especially in commercial and investment treaty arbitration.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is emergency arbitrator relief available in your country? Are decisions made by emergency arbitrators readily enforceable?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Arbitration Act and other national legislation do not set forth provisions for emergency arbitrators. However, the CAAI Arbitration Rules prescribe relevant provisions in Article 26 and Schedule 1 thereto.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there arbitral laws or arbitration institutional rules in your country providing simplified or expedited procedures for claims under a certain value? Are they often used?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Pursuant to Article 36 of the Arbitration Act, where the matter falls under a \u201cSimplified Procedures\u201d as defined in Article 427 of the Code of Civil Procedure, or where the parties have so agreed, a sole arbitrator shall be appointed by the arbitration institution to conduct the proceedings under its simplified arbitration rules. Under the Code of Civil Procedure, \u201cSimplified Procedures cases\u201d include those where the amount or value in dispute does not exceed NTD 500,000, as well as certain designated types of cases (such as Actions arising from disputes over a fixed-term lease of a building or other object of work, or from a fixed-term lender-borrower relationship; Actions between employers and employees arising from employment contracts with terms of less than one year; Actions between guests and hotel owners, food and beverage store owners, or carriers arising from food, accommodation, freight costs, or deposit of baggage or property; and etc.,) which are subject to simplified procedures regardless of the amount in dispute.<\/p>\n<p>As for the CAA, Articles 44 and following of the CAA Arbitration Rules set out the detailed procedures. Under these rules, arbitrations with simplified procedures are conducted by a sole arbitrator and generally conclude after a single hearing. In these cases, the award will issue within 3 months. Where the other party fails to appear without a valid reason, the tribunal may, upon the request of the attending party and after inquiry, proceed to render the award.<\/p>\n<p>However, in practice, simplified procedures have not been widely used in Taiwan, as arbitral awards are final and binding, and parties tend to prefer a full presentation of arguments and evidence to safeguard their rights.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have there been any recent court decisions in your country considering the setting aside of an award that has been enforced in another jurisdiction or vice versa?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Under Taiwanese arbitration law, an arbitral award that has already been successfully enforced abroad may not be set aside. According to the Supreme Court, Chapter 5 of the Arbitration Act on \u201cactions for setting aside an arbitral award\u201d applies only to domestic arbitral awards. Foreign arbitral awards, by contrast, are governed by Chapter 7 and acquire the same effect as a final judgment only after being recognized by a Taiwanese court, at which point they may be enforced. In other words, foreign arbitral awards in Taiwan are subject solely to review through the \u201crecognition and enforcement\u201d procedure, and cannot be challenged by way of setting aside.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have there been any recent court decisions in your country considering the issue of corruption? What standard do local courts apply for proving corruption? Which party bears the burden of proving corruption?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In a 2017 Taiwan High Court Civil Judgment, the court set aside a 2008 CAA arbitral award on the grounds that one of the arbitrators was criminally convicted for accepting bribes under Article 40, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 6 of the Arbitration Act. Subparagraph 6 provides that criminal misconduct by an arbitrator constitutes a valid ground to annul an arbitral award. The court held that the conviction must be final and binding. As for the burden of proof, the party seeking to annul the award bears the burden of proving the corruption, typically by relying on a final criminal judgment.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have there been any recent court decisions in your country with respect to intra-European investor-State arbitration generally or enforcement of awards stemming from proceedings of this nature? Are there any pending decisions?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Taiwanese laws do incorporate anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing (CTF) regulations, which may indirectly relate to issues typically associated with international sanctions. Besides these, due to Taiwan\u2019s unusual international status, neither legislation nor arbitral rules have incorporated international economic sanctions as a consideration or restriction in the conduct of international arbitration proceedings.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have arbitral institutions in your country implemented reforms towards greater use of technology and a more cost-effective conduct of arbitrations? Have there been any recent developments regarding virtual hearings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>During the pandemic, arbitral hearings were predominantly conducted by video conference to ensure continuity of proceedings. Even after the pandemic, video conferencing has remained an available solution in specific circumstances, particularly where an arbitrator resides abroad and cannot be physically present at the hearing venue. This has allowed arbitral tribunals to balance efficiency with accessibility, while still preserving the integrity of the process.<\/p>\n<p>Flexibility also exists with respect to witness testimony. Where a witness is unable to appear in person, and subject to the approval of the arbitral tribunal, testimony may be given through telephone or video conference. This approach provides a means to accommodate logistical or geographical constraints, while ensuring that the proceedings remain fair and that the tribunal and parties retain an opportunity to examine the witness effectively.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have there been any recent developments in your jurisdiction with regard to disputes involving ESG issues such as climate change, sustainability, social responsibility and\/or human rights?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No, there have been no recent developments in Taiwan regarding arbitration for disputes related to climate change or human rights. According to Article 1, Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Arbitration Act, only disputes that are lawfully capable of settlement may be submitted to arbitration. However, Taiwanese legislation, including the Civil Code and the Code of Civil Procedure, does not clearly define which matters cannot be settled. To date, there have been no court decisions recognizing human rights or climate change issues as arbitrable or as subjects of lawful settlement.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have any international economic sanctions regimes been implemented (either independently, or based on EU law) in your jurisdiction recently? Have there been any recent decisions in your country considering the impact of sanctions on international arbitration proceedings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Taiwanese laws do incorporate anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing (CTF) regulations, which may indirectly relate to issues typically associated with international sanctions. Besides these, due to Taiwan\u2019s unusual international status, neither legislation nor arbitral rules have incorporated international economic sanctions as a consideration or restriction in the conduct of international arbitration proceedings.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Has your country implemented any rules or regulations regarding the use of artificial intelligence, generative artificial intelligence or large language models in the context of international arbitration?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Several seminars have been held in Taiwan on this topic, and the Judicial Yuan has commissioned Chunghwa Telecom to develop a generative AI system for drafting court decisions in certain types of cases since 2022. Nonetheless, there are currently no rules or regulations governing the use of AI (including generative AI and large language models) in the context of international arbitration.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\r\n<div class=\"word-count-hidden\" style=\"display:none;\">Estimated word count: <span class=\"word-count\">7329<\/span><\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<\/ol>\r\n\r\n<script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"\/wp-content\/themes\/twentyseventeen\/src\/jquery\/components\/filter-guides.js\" async><\/script><\/div>"}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide\/119688","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/comparative_guide"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=119688"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}