A. LEGISLATION, TRENDS AND TENDENCIES There were no significant legislative or regulatory developments in relation to arbitration in Taiwan in 2013. B. CASES B.1 Res Judicata and Issue Preclusion Article 400 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides for the effect of res judicata of a final court judgment. By virtue of Article 37(1) of the Arbitration Law, which states that “[a]n award shall, insofar as relevant, be binding on the parties and have the same force as a final judgment of a court,” it is recognized in Taiwan that an arbitral award also has the effect of res judicata.4 In terms of the effect of “issue preclusion,” previously the courts were split on whether a final court judgment would have such an effect. For example, in Judgment 73-Tai-Shang-Tze No. 4062 (27 September 1984), the Taiwan Supreme Court held that for any important disputed issue other than the subject matter of a lawsuit, if the court decided on such issue and indicated the reason for deciding in the final judgment, such decision shall be binding on the parties and the court in a second lawsuit concerning the same issue, unless the final judgment was obviously in contravention of the laws and regulations or a party has presented new evidence that could overturn the decision on that issue in the final judgment.