Newsletter
DISPUTES OVER RIGHT TO REPRESENT US CORPORA-TIONS IN ROC LITIGATION
In the past, some courts have held that the ques-tion who should represent a foreign corporation in litigation in Taiwan, should be determined according to the relevant provisions of the ROC Civil Code or Company Law. But a recent judgment of the Supreme Court corrects this view.
In a 2003 judgment involving alleged infringe-ment of the copyright of a US corporation, the Supreme Court stated that according to Article 6 of the Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation between the United States of Amer-ica and the Republic of China, when a US na-tional, corporation or association engages in le-gal proceedings in the ROC, it is subject to ROC procedural law; however, when a US corporation engaged in litigation in the ROC appoints a person to act as its legal representative, the questions whether the person appointing the representative has the power to make such an appointment on the US corporation's behalf, and whether the representative so appointed has the lawful authority to bring an action on the cor-poration's behalf, are matters of private law, and should be decided according to the applicable substantive law.
Thus when a US company is engaged in litiga-tion in Taiwan, private law issues such as whether the company has been properly incor-porated and enjoys the status of a juristic person, the company's capacity to act and capacity for legal liability, and the nature of its organization and powers, should be determined according to US laws. It is not appropriate for ROC courts to directly apply the provisions of ROC civil law, by a ruling that only a responsible officer of a company as defined by the ROC Company Law has the power to represent the company.