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.