The Supreme Administrative Court is located in the venue of the central government.

Cases under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Administrative Court are as follows:
1. Appeal cases that are filed or lodged against the rulings of the High Administrative Litigation Divisions of the High Administrative court.
2. Other cases provided by law that are under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Administrative Court.

The Supreme Administrative Court shall have one President, who is named by special appointment and who also serves as a Judge, and is in charge of the overall administration of the court.
The president of the Supreme Administrative Court as prescribed in the preceding Paragraph shall be selected from candidates who possess one of the following qualifications, and who also have the required leadership ability:
1. Has served as a Justice of the Judicial Yuan, the President of the Supreme Administrative Court, the President of the Supreme Court, the Prosecutor General of the Supreme Prosecutors Office, or the President of the Disciplinary Court.
2. Has served as a judge in an Administrative Court, a judge in the Supreme Administrative Court, a judge in the Supreme Court, or as a prosecutor in the Supreme Prosecutors Office, or as the President in a High Administrative Court, the President in a High Court, or as the Chief Prosecutor in a High Prosecutors Office for a total of five years.
3. Has served as a selection rank judge in an Administrative Court, or a selection rank judicial judge for more than ten years, or has served as a selection rank judge in an Administrative Court, or a selection rank judicial judge and selection rank judicial administrative personnel for a total of more than ten years.

The Supreme Administrative Court shall have court divisions for case trials, the number of which shall be dependent on the case load.
Each division of the Supreme Administrative Court shall have one Division-Chief Judge, to be served concurrently either by the judge who serves as the President on a concurrent basis or by any of the rest of the judges. The Division-Chief Judge shall oversee the divisional affairs

Each division of the Supreme Administrative Court shall have five judges.
To cope with the work load, the Judicial Yuan may transfer judges, judges-in-probation or judges-in-training from High Administrative Courts, High Courts, or every level of lower courts thereof to the Supreme Administrative Court, with one to five judges for each division court, to assist the presiding judge with trial proceedings, substantive analysis, information collection and analysis, and drafting of judgments.
When necessary, the Supreme Administrative Court may have judicial assistants to assist with the management of trial proceedings, procedural analysis, information collection and analysis. The position of a judicial assistant is to be filled with professional personnel in accordance with relevant applicable laws of contract-based employment, or by transferring other judicial personnel from courts of every level or administrative courts, or by temporarily transferring appropriate personnel from other agencies.
The years that a judge, a judge-in-probation or a judge-in-training has served on the Supreme Administrative Court shall be counted towards his seniority of a judge, a judge-in-probation, or a judge-in-training.
For those who have a professional qualification, their service years as a judicial assistant shall be counted towards the seniority of their professional practices.
The regulations governing personnel selections of a judicial assistant shall be prescribed by the Judicial Yuan.

The Supreme Administrative Court shall establish a Grand Chamber to adjudicate legal disputes.

When any of the supreme administrative courts reviews a trial case, if the judgment-based legal opinion is deemed, after a review, different from the antecedent legal opinion for the judgment, reasons should be stated in a ruling, and the case should be submitted to the Grand Chamber for adjudication.
Before making a ruling for a case as mentioned in the preceding paragraph, the said supreme administrative court should confer with the opinions of other courts with letters of consultation. The consulting court shall reply in writing within 30 days; if no reply is received within 30 days, it is deemed to maintain the antecedent legal opinion for the judgment. Only after one of the consulting courts asserts a stand to maintain the antecedent legal opinion, can the court then make a ruling for the case, as mentioned in the preceding paragraph.

When any of the supreme administrative courts reviews a trial case, if the judgment-based legal opinion is deemed, after a review, significant in general principle, reasons should be stated in a ruling, and the case should be submitted to the Grand Chamber for adjudication.

During a trial in a panel of the Supreme Administrative Court, if there are legal opinions in which the parties consider significant enough to sway the judgment, are dissenting with the antecedent judgment opinions, or are significant in general principle, the parties may indicate the following information in a written statement, and file a motion with the court that accepted the case to submit said case with a ruling to the Grand Chamber for judgment.
1. Legal provisions involved;
2. The judgment that derives from dissenting opinions, or the specific contents of the legal opinion that are significant in general principle;
3. The impact of the said dissenting opinions, or the opinions of general significance, on the outcome of the judgment;
4. The legal opinions and reasons held by the movant.
The parties should retain an agent ad litem to file a motion, as mentioned in the preceding paragraph.
Any one of the panels of the Supreme Administrative Court may rule to reject the motion if it deems that the motion is not in compliance with legal procedures, or if it should not be legally permitted.

The court submitting the case may state reasons in a ruling and withdraw the submitted case prior to the conclusion of oral arguments in the Grand Chamber, if and when the status of the said legal dispute has rendered it unnecessary.
Before the Grand Chamber announces its judgment, it is possible to state the reasons in a ruling and withdraw the submitted case, if and when there is no need to unify the opinions about the legal dispute concerned.

The adjudicating of legal disputes in the Grand Chamber shall be conducted by a collegial panel of nine judges, and the president of the Supreme Administrative Court shall assume the position of the presiding judge.
The collegial panel of judges of the Grand Chamber is composed of one judge as assigned by the court submitting the case, and seven judges elected by ballot.
Each panel of the Supreme Administrative Court should have at least one judge as an elected judge of the Grand Chamber, as mentioned in the preceding paragraph.

The term of office for elected judges, as mentioned in the second Paragraph of the preceding Article, is two years. The candidates for elected judges and substitutes are selected by a secret ballot in a judge meeting, from the entire board of judges, with priority given to the number of votes from high to low, and in compliance with the method as described in the provisions of the third Paragraph of the preceding Article.
If the president is absent, or is not available to serve as the presiding judge for any reason, the vacancy shall be filled by a substitute judge, as mentioned in the preceding Paragraph, and the most senior division chief judge in terms of experience of the Grand Chamber shall serve as the presiding judge; if no division chief judge is available, the most senior court judge in terms of experiences shall fill the vacancy; if more than one judge has the same seniority based on experience, then the judge with the most seniority, based on age, shall serve in the position. If an elected judge of the Grand Chamber is absent or not available to serve as the judge for the Grand Chamber, the vacancy shall be filled by a substitute judge, as mentioned in the preceding Paragraph.
If the judge assigned by the court submitting the case, as mentioned in the second Paragraph of the preceding Article, is absent or is not available to serve as a judge of the Grand Chamber, the court submitting the case shall assign another court judge to serve in the position.
When there is a change of judges due to a reelection in the Grand Chamber, the legal dispute under review by the Grand Chamber shall remain with the same Grand Chamber until the review has reached its conclusion. If a judge of the said Grand Chamber is absent or not available to serve in the Grand Chamber, the position shall be filled by a substitute judge, who was selected at the time when the legal dispute was submitted to the Grand Chamber.
If the recusal at the judgment of the Grand Chamber by a judge of the Grand Chamber who was previously involved in the judgment of the case submitted by the court before the rehearing will result in absence of any judges from the panel of the Supreme Administrative Court previously in charge of the case in the Grand Chamber, the recusal will not be necessary.
The request for recusal of a judge in the Grand Chamber shall be ruled by a collegial panel of the Grand Chamber.
When the aforesaid ruling prohibits the judge whose recusal is requested from participating, the candidate for substitution shall be based on the stipulations in the second Subparagraph and the third Subparagraph or the substitute judge will be appointed. The substitute shall end on the judgment day of the case for which the recusal is requested.
When the President or a judge of the Grand Chamber is absent, the substitute judge shall serve until the end of the original tenure.
When the presiding judge or any judge of the Grand Chamber is unable to serve due to circumstances, the substitute judge or the appointee shall serve the tenure of the substitute judge or the appointee's duty for the Grand Chamber last until the conclusion of the circumstances. However, the substitute judge shall serve until the expiry of the original tenure if the remaining tenure is less than three months.

When adjudicating legal disputes, the Grand Chamber should conduct oral arguments.
The parties should retain an agent ad litem to perform the oral arguments, as mentioned in the preceding Paragraph.
On the date of oral arguments, as referred to in the first Paragraph, if one of the parties has not retained an agent ad litem, or if the agent ad litem is not present, adjudication shall be decided after the agent ad litem who is present makes his/her statement. If agents ad litem of both parties are not present, the oral arguments will not be conducted.
When the Grand Chamber deems it necessary, the Court may ex officio, or on a motion by the parties, their agents, or defense attorneys, select experts or scholars of specific professional legal issues to present their legal opinions in writing, or make statements during oral arguments.
The persons, who present statements as described in the preceding Paragraph, shall disclose the following information:
1. Whether or not, during the preparation or submission of relevant professional opinions or information, they have a delegation or cooperation relationship with the parties, interested parties, or their agents.
2. Whether or not, during the preparation or submission of relevant professional opinions or information, they have received monetary remuneration, or financial assistance, or its equivalent price or value, from the parties, interested parties, or their agents.
3. The identities of other people who provided monetary remuneration or assistance, and its price or value.

When adjudicating a legal dispute, the Grand Chamber should document the main text of and reasons for the ruling, and the said ruling should be pronounced within 30 days of the conclusion of arguments.
Judges’ minority opinions, which are different from the majority opinions formed during the review period, after being recorded in the review book and submitted as a written record of the different opinions (minority report) prior to the pronouncement of a ruling, should be promulgated along with the ruling.

The ruling of a Grand Chamber is legally binding on cases submitted by the submitting courts.

Unless otherwise prescribed by this Act, the provisions of Administrative Litigation Procedure Act, and/or other relevant regulations that are not contradictory to the normative nature of Grand Chambers, shall also apply.

(deleted)

The applicability of precedent cases compiled by the Supreme Administrative Court prior to the enactment of the amendment of this Act, on December 7, 2018, should be suspended, if the full text of the judgment is not available for reference.
The precedents, in which the applicability has not been suspended prior to the stipulation of the preceding paragraph, have the same effect as the Supreme Administrative Court judgments that have not been selected as precedents.
Within three years after the implementation of the amended Act on December 7, 2018, if there is doubt, that the precedents, or resolutions, on which the final and binding judgment of the people's case is based, are contradictory to the Constitution, the people may file a motion for Constitutional interpretations pursuant to the provisions of Article 5 Paragraph 1 Subparagraph 2 of the Judicial Yuan Justices Reviewing Cases Act.