Taiwan 2022-B

Taiwan is not a Contracting State to the New York Convention. Its Arbitration Act, however, is modeled on the Convention.

            In a 2011 decision, the Hsinchu District Court (Civil Ruling No. 2010 Kang-Zi 29) declined to refuse recognition of a foreign award on the basis that “the country where the arbitral award is made or whose laws govern the arbitral award does not recognize arbitral awards of [Taiwan]” (Art. 49(2) of Taiwan’s Arbitration Act). The Finnish applicant sought enforcement of an award rendered in Finland. The Taiwanese respondent argued that enforcement should be denied because Finland would not recognize Taiwanese awards as Taiwan is not a New York Convention State. The Court reasoned that while Art. I(3) of the Convention allows its Contracting States to make the reciprocity reservation, it does not limit the recognition and enforcement of awards to those made in the territory of another Contracting State. The fact that Finland made no reciprocity reservation, and that the Taiwanese party failed to prove that Finnish courts systematically refused to enforce Taiwanese awards, was sufficient ground to reject this objection.

Taiwan – Republic of China

Original full text
Full text decision Taiwan 2022-B

Excerpt decision Taiwan 2022-B

Topics in Taiwan 2022-B
¶101 » Award made in the territory of another (Contracting) State (paragraphs 1 and 3 – first or "reciprocity" reservation)

< Back to overview