Taiwanese lawyer Cai Kunzhou posted on a social media platform, alleging that a Chinese lawyer may have illegally acted as a litigation representative for an Austrian company at the Taichung District Court. The Taichung District Prosecutor’s Office stated that foreign lawyers are not allowed to practice law in Taiwan without approval from the Ministry of Justice, and the case has been separated for investigation.
In a post on the social media site Threads, Cai Kunzhou stated that during a court session at the Taichung District Court on the 13th, he found a Chinese lawyer illegally acting as a litigation representative. Despite his objection in court, the lawyer argued that “the law does not prohibit it.” If this behavior is tolerated, it may set a precedent for foreign individuals to bypass qualification reviews and enter the Taiwanese judicial system, not only undermining the professionalism of local lawyers but also posing a threat to judicial security and national security.
The Taichung District Prosecutor’s Office issued a press release today (14th), stating that a post on a social media platform recently revealed that a Chinese lawyer may have been acting as a litigation representative at the Taichung District Court, leading to widespread attention and discussions due to queries about its legality.
According to the Taichung District Prosecutor’s Office, individuals who obtained their lawyer qualifications outside the Republic of China are considered foreign lawyers. Without approval from the Ministry of Justice and joining the Bar Association within 6 months of approval, foreign lawyers are not allowed to practice law, as stipulated in Articles 114 and 115 of the Lawyer Act.
The Taichung District Prosecutor’s Office stated that the unidentified litigation representative mentioned in the post is suspected of violating the Lawyer Act. The office has proactively separated the case and assigned a prosecutor to investigate.
In a press release today (14th), the Taichung District Court stated that, according to Article 68 of the Civil Procedure Law, litigation representatives should generally appoint a lawyer. However, in cases where a non-lawyer is employed by a legal entity or non-legal entity to engage in legal work and is appointed as a litigation representative with the permission of the head judge, they may also be accepted as a litigation representative for civil cases, as set out in the “Non-lawyers as Litigation Representatives Permit Criteria” under the second article of the third clause.
The Taichung District Court explained that the reported case is a civil litigation case with an Austrian company as the defendant. They appointed a mainland Chinese lawyer named Liu, who lacks qualifications as a Taiwanese lawyer, as the litigation representative based on the document. During the first oral argument session on August 13th, Liu clarified that he was acting as the litigation representative in his capacity as being employed by the defendant’s legal team.
The Taichung District Court clarified that due to Liu’s lack of Taiwanese lawyer qualifications and failure to provide relevant evidence, the presiding judge did not permit him to act as the representative. The court instructed Liu to correct the information and the lawsuit’s procedural hearing did not take place on the 13th.