Legal Insights

Receiving a copy of a complaint or a hearing notice from the court simply means that someone has filed a civil lawsuit against you and that the court has begun processing the case. It does not mean that the court has accepted the plaintiff's claims or that you will necessarily lose the case.

A civil lawsuit generally begins when the plaintiff files a complaint with the court. Under Article 244 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure, the plaintiff must specify the parties, the subject matter of the action and the underlying facts, as well as the relief sought from the court. After receiving the complaint, the court will first examine whether it complies with the applicable legal requirements. If there are no obvious procedural defects, the court will usually serve a copy of the complaint on the defendant and require the defendant to file a written defense or appear before the court.

Accordingly, the primary purpose of serving the complaint on the defendant is to inform the defendant:

• Who has filed the lawsuit against you;
• What judgment the plaintiff is asking the court to issue;
• The facts and legal grounds relied upon by the plaintiff; and
• When you must file your written defense or appear before the court.

This is part of the defendant's right to be heard and to participate in the proceedings. The court must give both parties an opportunity to present their arguments, evidence, and legal opinions before rendering a judgment. In other words, although the plaintiff files the complaint first, its contents represent only the plaintiff's unilateral allegations. The judge must still hear both sides, examine the evidence, and apply the law before deciding whether the plaintiff's claims should be upheld.

For example, the plaintiff may claim that you failed to repay a loan, while you may argue that:

• No loan agreement ever existed between the parties;
• The debt has already been repaid;
• The bank transfer relied upon by the plaintiff was made for another purpose;
• The claim is barred by the applicable statute of limitations;
• The amount claimed has been calculated incorrectly; or
• The plaintiff has failed to perform its own contractual obligations.

Whether these defenses succeed depends on the evidence presented to the court. Accordingly, merely receiving a complaint does not determine the outcome of the case.

However, this does not mean that you should ignore court documents.

In practice, when the court serves a copy of the complaint, it often requires the defendant to file a written defense within a specified period. For example, the court may require the defendant to submit a written response within a certain number of days or weeks after receiving the documents. Therefore, once you receive court documents, you should immediately confirm:

• The case number and the court handling the case;
• The plaintiff's claims;
• The deadline for filing your written defense;
• The date, time, and location of the hearing;
• The evidence attached to the complaint; and
• Whether you should retain a lawyer.

It is particularly important to note that documents served by the court often have procedural consequences. For example, the statutory time limits for filing an appeal, an interlocutory appeal, or taking other procedural actions may begin to run upon service of the court documents. Therefore, you should never ignore court documents simply because you believe the plaintiff's allegations are unreasonable or without merit.

In short, receiving a complaint does not mean that you have already lost the case. However, failing to respond promptly may cause you to lose an important opportunity to present your defenses and supporting evidence. The best course of action is to carefully review the complaint and its attachments, organize relevant contracts, payment records, communications, correspondence, and other evidence, and prepare an appropriate defense based on the circumstances of your case. 

Many people assume, "I don't owe the money," "The lawsuit is completely groundless, so I don't need to respond," or "If I don't attend the hearing, the judge will investigate the case and realize the plaintiff has no valid claim." In reality, these are among the most common misconceptions in civil litigation, and they often lead to serious consequences.

Once you receive a complaint, a hearing notice, or other court documents, the case has formally entered court proceedings. If the defendant neither files a written defense nor appears before the court, the court will not suspend the proceedings or automatically dismiss the plaintiff's claims. Under Article 385 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure, where the statutory requirements are met, the court may proceed with the hearing and render a judgment based on a one-sided hearing. In other words, even if only one party appears, the court may continue the proceedings and render a judgment based on the available evidence.

Furthermore, civil litigation in Taiwan follows the principles of party presentation and the adversarial system. The court primarily decides the case based on the parties' claims and the evidence they present, and it does not necessarily investigate facts favorable to either party on its own initiative. Therefore, if the defendant:

• Fails to file a written defense;
• Fails to present evidence supporting their position; or
• Fails to appear and explain their case,

the court may have no choice but to decide the case based on the plaintiff's evidence and legal arguments, thereby increasing the risk of an unfavorable judgment.

Of course, failing to appear does not necessarily mean that the defendant will lose the case. For example, if the plaintiff's evidence is clearly insufficient or the legal claims themselves are without merit, the court may still dismiss the lawsuit even if the defendant does not appear. However, in practice, a defendant who does not participate in the proceedings effectively gives up the opportunity to explain the facts, present evidence, and challenge the plaintiff's allegations, making it more difficult for the court to understand the full circumstances of the dispute.

Accordingly, after receiving court documents, you should at least:

• Confirm what the court requires you to do;
• Note the deadline for filing a written defense or other submissions;
• Confirm the date, time, and location of the hearing;
• Organize relevant contracts, receipts, bank transfer records, communications, and other evidence; and
• Consider whether you should retain a lawyer.

If you are genuinely unable to attend the hearing due to hospitalization, overseas travel, a serious emergency, or another legitimate reason, you should notify the court as early as possible and, where appropriate, apply to have the hearing rescheduled rather than simply failing to appear.

In short, receiving court documents does not mean that you will lose the case. However, completely ignoring them may cause you to lose the opportunity to present your case and defend your legal rights before the court.

Under Taiwanese law, parties may represent themselves in most civil cases without appointing a lawyer. However, being legally allowed to represent yourself and being well-suited to do so are two different things. Civil litigation involves much more than simply explaining the facts to the court. It also requires an understanding of procedural rules, such as:

• How to present admissible and effective evidence;
• How to identify and argue the applicable legal basis;
• How to organize the facts and prepare written submissions;
• How to respond when the opposing party raises new claims or defenses;
• Whether it is necessary to apply for evidence collection, expert examination, or preservation of evidence; and
• When new claims or arguments must be raised to avoid being rejected as untimely.

Therefore, even if the underlying facts are relatively straightforward, a lack of familiarity with civil procedure may still affect the outcome of the case.

In addition, certain civil proceedings require mandatory legal representation. For example, under Article 466-1 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure, a party filing a third-instance appeal to the Supreme Court must generally appoint a lawyer as litigation counsel, unless a statutory exception applies. In most cases, parties may not conduct third-instance proceedings on their own.

From a practical perspective, whether to retain a lawyer also depends on the nature of the dispute. It is generally advisable to seek legal representation where the case:

• Involves a substantial amount in dispute;
• Raises complex legal issues;
• Concerns corporate governance, shareholder rights, contracts, or intellectual property;
• Involves extensive evidence or multiple parties; or
• Has cross-border, international, or foreign judgment recognition issues.

On the other hand, where the legal issues are relatively straightforward, the facts are clear, and the amount in dispute is relatively small, some parties may choose to represent themselves.

Even if you decide to handle the case on your own, it is still advisable to consult a lawyer beforehand. A legal consultation can help you understand the legal issues involved, the burden of proof, and the potential litigation risks before deciding whether to proceed without legal representation.

After all, the purpose of civil litigation is not simply to tell your side of the story. More importantly, it is to present legally admissible claims and evidence that the court can rely upon. In many cases, the outcome is determined not by the facts themselves, but by insufficient evidence, incorrect legal arguments, or procedural mistakes.

Accordingly, whether to retain a lawyer should be evaluated based on the importance and complexity of the case, the amount in dispute, and your familiarity with legal procedures—not simply on the assumption that "being right means you will win."

Under Article 77-13 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure, a plaintiff filing a civil lawsuit must pay court fees based on the value of the claim. In general, the higher the amount claimed, the higher the court fees. Therefore, before commencing a civil lawsuit, a plaintiff should consider not only the likelihood of success, but also the court fees that may be incurred.

After receiving the complaint, the court will usually calculate the required court fees. If the plaintiff has not paid the correct amount, the court will order the plaintiff to make up the deficiency within a specified period. If the plaintiff fails to do so within the prescribed time, the court may dismiss the action in accordance with the law. It is important to note, however, that court fees are procedural costs paid to the court—they are not compensation paid to the opposing party.

Another common misconception is: "If I win the lawsuit, the other party must reimburse all of my expenses."

In fact, this is not how the law works. Under Article 78 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure, litigation costs are generally borne by the losing party. If each party prevails on part of its claims, the court may allocate the litigation costs between the parties according to their respective degree of success.

The term "litigation costs" primarily refers to expenses recognized by law, such as:

• Court filing fees;
• Witness attendance fees and travel expenses;
• Expert witness fees;
• Inspection expenses; and
• Other litigation expenses recognized by law.

In general, attorney's fees paid by a party are not automatically recoverable from the opposing party.

In other words, even if you ultimately prevail in the lawsuit, you will ordinarily remain responsible for paying your own attorney's fees (unless otherwise provided by law or agreed upon by contract). Accordingly, before deciding whether to file a civil lawsuit, you should consider not only your chances of success, but also the potential costs involved and whether any favorable judgment is likely to be enforceable. After all, it is not enough simply to ask whether you are likely to win the case—you should also consider whether the lawsuit is worth pursuing and whether you are likely to recover the amount awarded.

Many people believe that the judge will investigate the facts or help the innocent party find supporting evidence. In reality, one of the key differences between civil litigation and criminal investigations is that civil litigation follows the principles of party presentation and the adversarial system. Under Article 277 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure, a party who asserts facts in its own favor bears the burden of proving those facts. In other words, the party making a claim is responsible for proving it.

For example:

• If you claim that the other party owes you money, you should provide evidence such as a loan agreement, bank transfer records, or communications between the parties.
• If you claim that a contract was formed, you should provide the contract, quotations, emails, or other evidence demonstrating the parties' agreement.
• If you claim that a debt has already been repaid, you should provide proof of payment, receipts, or other supporting documents.

If you are unable to produce sufficient evidence to support your claims, you may lose the case even if the facts are actually true. Accordingly, the judge's role is not to gather evidence on behalf of either party, but to act as a neutral decision-maker and determine the case based on the facts, evidence, and legal arguments presented by both sides.

That said, this does not mean the court can never assist in obtaining evidence. If certain evidence is held by a third party, such as:

• Bank transaction records;
• Documents maintained by government agencies;
• Corporate accounting records;
• Medical records; or
• Surveillance footage,

a party may apply to the court to investigate the evidence and request that the relevant authority or third party produce it. However, the party must specifically identify the evidence sought and explain why it is necessary. The court will not conduct a broad investigation simply because a party asks the court to "find out the truth" or "obtain the evidence on my behalf."

For this reason, preparing evidence is just as important as making legal arguments in civil litigation.

In practice, many cases are lost not because the law is unfavorable, but because the available evidence is insufficient. Therefore, if a civil dispute arises, you should preserve all relevant documents and records from the outset, and consult with your lawyer as soon as possible to determine which evidence may require the court's assistance in obtaining through its legal authority.

Many people ask questions such as:

"I know the other party owes me money, but I don't have a promissory note."

"Our agreement was only made verbally."

"The evidence is in the other party's possession."

"I only have our LINE conversations. Is that enough?"

In fact, Taiwanese civil procedure does not require a particular type of evidence before a lawsuit can be filed. In other words, even if you do not have a promissory note, a written contract, or other formal documents, other forms of evidence may still support your claims, such as:

• LINE or other instant messaging records;
• Emails;
• Bank transfer records;
• Invoices or receipts;
• Audio recordings, photographs, or videos;
• Witness testimony; or
• Other materials capable of proving the relevant facts.

Accordingly, what truly matters is not the type of evidence, but whether the evidence is sufficient to convince the court that the facts you allege actually occurred. If some of the evidence is in the possession of the opposing party or a third party, that does not necessarily mean your case cannot proceed. Under the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure, a party may, depending on the circumstances, apply to the court to investigate or obtain evidence, such as records held by government agencies, hospitals, or banks.

However, as discussed earlier, whether the court grants such an application depends on whether the applicant specifically identifies the evidence sought and explains why it is necessary. The court will not conduct a broad investigation simply because a party asks the court to "find the evidence."

In addition, if you are concerned that certain evidence may later be lost, destroyed, or become difficult to obtain—for example:

• Surveillance footage that is about to be overwritten;
• Website content that may soon be deleted; or
• A building or piece of equipment that is about to be demolished,

Article 368 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure allows a party to apply to the court for preservation of evidence, enabling the court to examine or preserve the evidence before it becomes unavailable.

Accordingly, having limited evidence does not necessarily prevent you from filing a lawsuit. Nevertheless, before commencing litigation, it is advisable to organize all available materials, evaluate which facts are already supported by evidence, determine what additional evidence may be needed, and consider whether the court's assistance should be sought to obtain it.

In many cases, it is not that there is no evidence at all, but rather that the parties fail to recognize that their conversations, emails, payment records, and other everyday documents may become important evidence. This is why it is advisable to consult a lawyer before filing a lawsuit to assess whether your evidence is sufficient and how additional evidence may be obtained to support your case.

As a general rule, it is advisable to attend the hearing in person or be represented by a lawyer.

One of the most common questions people ask after receiving a court hearing notice is:

"I'm busy with work. Do I really have to attend?"

"Can my lawyer attend on my behalf?"

"What happens if I don't appear?"

First, civil litigation is different from criminal proceedings. Civil cases primarily concern property rights and private legal disputes. Accordingly, a party who fails to attend a hearing will not be arrested, detained, or declared wanted simply for failing to appear. However, this does not mean that court hearing notices can be ignored.

Civil litigation is conducted through oral hearings. During a hearing, the judge will typically:

• Identify the issues in dispute;
• Ask questions about the facts of the case;
• Organize the evidence;
• Encourage the parties to reach a settlement; and
• Give directions regarding the subsequent proceedings.

If a party does not attend the hearing, they may lose the opportunity to explain their case directly to the judge, respond to the opposing party's arguments, and present their own position.

Furthermore, under Article 385 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure, if one party fails to appear and the statutory requirements are met, the court may proceed with a one-sided hearing and render a judgment accordingly. Therefore, although failing to attend a hearing does not necessarily mean that you will lose the case, it may nevertheless have an adverse effect on your legal rights.

The situation may be different if you have already retained a lawyer. Under the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure, a litigation representative may perform many procedural acts on behalf of the party within the scope of the representation. Accordingly, if you are unable to attend the hearing for any reason, it is strongly advisable to have your lawyer appear before the court on your behalf to avoid the risk of a judgment being rendered following a one-sided hearing.

There is no fixed timeframe. The duration depends on the complexity of the case.

When deciding whether to file a lawsuit, one of the first questions many people ask is:

"How long will the lawsuit take?"

"Will it be over in just a few months?"

"Will the court keep delaying the case?"

In fact, Taiwanese law does not prescribe a specific time limit within which a civil case must be concluded. The length of a civil lawsuit depends on many factors, including:

• The complexity of the case;
• Whether the issues in dispute are clearly defined;
• Whether witnesses need to be called;
• Whether expert opinions are required;
• Whether evidence must be obtained from government agencies or third parties;
• The number of parties involved; and
• Whether an appeal is filed.

Generally speaking, where the facts are straightforward, the issues are clear, and the evidence is complete—for example, in a simple loan repayment or payment claim—the first-instance proceedings may be concluded within several months to approximately one year. However, if the case is more complex, such as where it involves extensive accounting records or financial transactions, requires expert examinations, or includes cross-border transactions or other international elements, the first-instance proceedings may take more than a year. If the case proceeds through the second and third instances, the entire litigation process may take several years.

In addition, it is common for one to two months—or even longer—to pass between court hearings. During this time, the court may be waiting for the parties to submit written briefs, obtaining evidence, awaiting expert reports, or handling other procedural matters. Accordingly, intervals of this length between hearings are entirely normal in practice.

That said, a lengthy litigation process does not mean the parties can only wait passively. Once the case is before the court, the parties should comply with the deadlines set by the court, submit written briefs on time, organize their evidence, and respond promptly to the opposing party's arguments. Doing so not only helps the court identify the issues more efficiently, but also reduces the risk of losing the opportunity to present important claims or evidence due to procedural deadlines.

Furthermore, if both parties are willing to settle, they may reach a settlement at any stage of the litigation. Many civil disputes are resolved through settlement during the court proceedings, without waiting for a final judgment. Therefore, rather than focusing solely on how long the litigation will take, it is far more important to prepare the case thoroughly, present complete evidence, and manage the progress of the litigation effectively. Doing so will improve both the efficiency of the proceedings and the likelihood of achieving a favorable resolution.

Yes, they can. In fact, courts generally encourage parties to resolve disputes through settlement whenever possible.

Many people believe that once a civil lawsuit has been filed, it must continue until the court issues a judgment. In reality, that is not the case. Settlement is often an important way to resolve civil disputes. Many cases are settled during the course of the proceedings—or even on the day of the hearing—with the assistance of the judge, without waiting for the court to render a judgment.

Under Article 377 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure, the court may attempt to facilitate a settlement at any stage of the proceedings. In other words, whether the lawsuit has just been filed, is currently being heard, or is close to judgment, the court may assist the parties in reaching a settlement whenever there is still a possibility of resolving the dispute.

Moreover, the parties do not have to wait for the court to initiate settlement discussions. They are free to negotiate privately at any time or conduct settlement negotiations through their lawyers. If a settlement is reached before the court, Article 380, Paragraph 1 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure provides that the settlement has the same legal effect as a final and binding judgment. This means that if one party later fails to perform the settlement terms, the other party may apply directly for compulsory enforcement based on the settlement record, without having to file a new lawsuit. Accordingly, a judicial settlement is not merely a private agreement—it carries significant legal force.

That said, whether to accept a settlement should be considered carefully in light of factors such as:

• The likelihood of success at trial;
• The time and cost of continuing the litigation;
• Whether a future judgment is likely to be enforceable;
• Whether you wish to resolve the dispute as soon as possible; and
• Whether the parties intend to maintain an ongoing business or commercial relationship.

Where the amount in dispute is relatively small, the parties expect to continue working together, or the costs of litigation may exceed the value of the claim, it may be sensible to actively consider settlement. On the other hand, if the parties' positions are too far apart or the dispute is likely to give rise to further legal issues, settlement may not be the most appropriate option. Ultimately, settlement should not be viewed as an admission of defeat, but rather as one of several legitimate ways to resolve a dispute. Whether to settle should be determined based on the facts of the case, the legal risks involved, and the parties' commercial and practical considerations.

The primary function of a court judgment is to determine the legal rights and obligations between the parties. For example, the court may order the defendant to repay a loan of NT$1,000,000. However, obtaining such a judgment does not mean that the NT$1,000,000 will automatically be transferred into the plaintiff's bank account. Instead, after the judgment becomes final and binding, the plaintiff must apply for compulsory enforcement. Only then can the court take enforcement measures, such as attaching and auctioning the defendant's real property, garnishing the defendant's bank accounts, garnishing the defendant's salary or other receivables, or enforcing against the defendant's shares or other property rights.

It is important to note, however, that even if you win the case, you are not guaranteed to recover the money. For example, if the defendant no longer has any assets, compulsory enforcement may ultimately recover nothing. For this reason, when evaluating a case, lawyers consider not only the likelihood of success on the merits, but also whether any judgment is likely to be collectible. Accordingly, before filing a civil lawsuit, it is often advisable to assess the opposing party's financial condition and ability to satisfy a judgment. Where appropriate, you may also consider applying for provisional attachment or other preservative measures to prevent the opposing party from disposing of assets during the litigation and thereby affecting the future enforcement of the judgment.

Not necessarily. A judgment rendered by the trial court is not always the final outcome.

Taiwan's civil litigation system generally provides for three levels of court proceedings. Subject to the applicable legal requirements, the losing party may file an appeal. In some cases, the judgment is completely reversed by the appellate court, while in others the original judgment is upheld even after an appeal. Accordingly, after receiving a judgment, you should consult a lawyer as soon as possible to evaluate both the judgment itself and the prospects of an appeal. This is particularly important because the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure imposes strict time limits for filing appeals. If the statutory deadline is missed, the judgment may become final and binding, and the right to appeal may be lost.

No.

Being named as a defendant in a civil lawsuit simply means that someone is asking the court to determine that you are liable for a civil obligation, such as repaying a loan, paying for goods, compensating for damages, or performing a contract. Even if the court ultimately rules against the defendant, the judgment merely confirms that the defendant is legally required to fulfill certain civil obligations, such as paying money, returning property, or performing contractual obligations. It does not result in a criminal record.

A "criminal record" generally refers to a criminal conviction that has become final and binding following criminal proceedings. Civil litigation does not involve the state's prosecution or punishment of criminal offenses. Accordingly, filing a civil lawsuit, being a plaintiff or defendant in a civil case, or losing a civil lawsuit will not, in principle, result in any criminal record.

Not necessarily.

Many people believe that before filing a lawsuit, they must first send a certified mail notice; otherwise, they cannot bring a civil action.

In fact, Taiwanese law does not require a certified mail notice to be sent before filing a civil lawsuit in every case. Nevertheless, in many situations, a certified mail notice serves important legal and practical purposes. For example, it may be used to:

• Formally demand that the other party perform a contractual obligation;
• Request payment of the purchase price, repayment of a loan, or settlement of a debt;
• Notify the other party of the rescission or termination of a contract, or the withdrawal of a declaration of intent;
• Demand that the other party cease infringing your legal rights; or
• Preserve a record of prior negotiations or formal demands.

In addition, certain legal consequences arise only after notice has been given to the other party. For example, under Taiwan's Civil Code, the exercise of certain rights—such as rescission, termination of a contract, or demanding performance within a reasonable period—requires notice to the other party before the intended legal effect takes place. In these circumstances, a certified mail notice often serves as important evidence of when notice was given and what was communicated.

As discussed earlier, evidence is of fundamental importance in civil litigation. Sending a certified mail notice before commencing legal proceedings can therefore be extremely helpful in establishing evidence during the litigation. However, sending such a notice is not appropriate in every case. In some situations, giving advance notice may allow the other party to transfer assets before the lawsuit is filed, making subsequent enforcement more difficult. Accordingly, whether a certified mail notice should be sent depends on the nature of the dispute, the available evidence, and the overall litigation strategy, rather than being a requirement in every case.