The Supreme Court rendered the 104-Tai-Shang-33 Civil Decision of January 8, 2015 (hereinafter, the "Decision"), holding that res judicata exists in a final ruling stated in the Code of Civil Procedure and the Arbitration Law should not be applied any more for a final civil decision and arbitration award rendered in mainland China.
According to the facts underlying the Decision, the parties caused the arbitral award to be rendered in mainland China and recognized by the court. The Appellee subsequently applied for compulsory enforcement against the Appellant based on the recognition ruling. In response, the Appellant filed an obligor's objection.
According to the Decision, Article 74 of the Statute for Relations Between the Citizens on Both Sides of the Strait does not stipulate criteria and relevant applicable provisions for determining the effect of a final civil adjudication and civil arbitral award rendered in mainland China like Article 42 of the Statute for Relations with Hong Kong and Macao, which was enacted and promulgated at a later time. A comparison between the two statutes shows the difference that the Statute for Relations with Hong Kong and Macao is a special law enacted to exclude the application of the Statute for Relations Between the Citizens on Both Sides of the Strait. To wit, a final civil adjudication or civil arbitral award rendered in mainland China can be recognized through non-litigation procedures due to the special cross-strait relations, and it is specifically stipulated that those which deal with payment can be enforced without being granted with a determinative force.
Therefore, it was held in the Decision that the provisions and legal principles concerning the effects of a foreign final civil adjudication and foreign arbitral award under the Code of Civil Procedure and the Arbitration Law should no longer be cited. Those civil adjudications and arbitral awards will able to be enforced without res judicata existing after being adjudicated or recognized by the ROC court. Therefore, although an arbitral award rendered in mainland China is recognized by an ROC court, an obligor still may file an obligor's opposition on grounds which existed before the arbitral award was rendered. In this Decision, the original decision was reversed and remanded for this reason.