A public juridical person may be sued in the administrative court where its principal office is located. A central or local government agency may be sued in the administrative court for the jurisdiction where such office is located.
A private juridical person or unincorporated association that has the capacity to be a party to a litigation may be sued in the administrative court for the location of its principal office or principal place of business.
A foreign juridical person or unincorporated association may be sued in the administrative court for the location of its principal office or principal place of business in the R.O.C.

For other litigations outside the scope of the preceding Article, a defendant may be sued in the administrative court for the place of the defendant's domicile or, when that court cannot exercise jurisdiction, in the administrative court for the place of defendant's residence.
Where a defendant has no place of domicile in the R.O.C., or where the defendant's place of domicile is unknown, then the defendant's place of residence in the R.O.C. shall be deemed to be the defendant's place of domicile. Where the defendant has no place of residence in the R.O.C. or where the defendant's place of residence is unknown, then the defendant's last place of domicile in the R.O.C. shall be deemed to be the defendant's place of domicile; where a defendant has no last place of domicile, the place where the central government is located shall be deemed to be the last place of domicile of such citizen.
A defendant may also be sued in the administrative court for the place of defendant's residence if facts of litigation take place within the defendant's residence.

Any litigation relating to expropriation, requisition or appropriation of real property shall be exclusively governed by the Administrative Court at the location of the real property.
In matters other than the preceding Paragraph relating to legal rights or relations under public law of the real property, a litigation may be initiated in the administrative court for the place where the real property is located.

In matters relating to the functions of officials, a litigation may be initiated in the administrative court at the place where the official performs functions.

In matters relating to the insurance cases under public law, a litigation may be initiated in the administrative court for the place of the plaintiff insured's or beneficiary's place of domicile or residence, or the place where the insured engages in vocational activities.
In the litigation prescribed in the preceding Paragraph where the plaintiff is an insured unit, such litigation may be initiated in the administrative court for the place of its principal office or principal place of business.

Except for cases in which both parties are indigenous peoples or tribes, the litigation that arises from public law rights or relationships with respect to indigenous peoples or their tribes may be adjudicated by the administrative court for the plaintiff's indigenous residence or where the government finds the plaintiff's tribe to be located.

The immediate superior administrative court shall, on motion of the parties or the request of the administrative court in which the litigation is pending, designate a court to exercise jurisdiction in case of any of the following:
1. When the administrative court with jurisdiction cannot exercise jurisdiction due to legal or actual impediments;
2. When an administrative court with jurisdiction cannot be determined because the jurisdictional boundaries are unascertainable; or
3. When special circumstances suggest that by exercising jurisdiction such administrative court may affect the public order or the fairness of the proceeding.
The motion provided in Paragraph 1 may be filed in the administrative court in which the litigation is pending or in its immediate superior administrative court.

An administrative court's jurisdiction shall be determined according to the standards existing at the time of the initiation of the litigation.

Articles 3, 6, 15, 17, Articles 20 to 22 inclusive, Paragraphs 1 and 3 of Article 28, and Article 29 to Article 31 inclusive of the Code of Civil Procedure shall apply mutatis mutandis to the circumstances prescribed in this Section.

A judge shall recuse himself or herself in any of the following circumstances:
1. Where there is one of the circumstances provided for in Subparagraphs 1 to 6 of Article 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure;
2. Where the judge participated in the decision-making of the administrative act or the petition-and-appeal decision at an agency at the central government or local government regarding the same case in dispute;
3. Where the judge participated in the civil adjudication or criminal adjudication relating to the same dispute;
4. Where the judge participated in the deliberation or adjudication of the cases concerning disciplinary measures against officials, judges, or prosecutors relating to the same dispute;
5. Where the judge participated in the earlier instances of the adjudication of the same dispute; or
6. Where the judge participated in earlier instances prior to rehearing of the same dispute. However, the recusal in such circumstance is limited to only once.

Articles 33 to 38 inclusive of the Code of Civil Procedure shall apply mutatis mutandis to the circumstances prescribed in this Section.

The provisions of the preceding two Articles shall apply mutatis mutandis to all Judicial Affair Officers, court clerks and interpreters.