For labor cases, the court shall in general conclude the oralargument within one session, and the first instance trial should be concluded within six months. However, this rule does not apply when cases are complex or when more time is needed by the trial.
For thepreparation of the oral argument session, the court should clarify relevant issues as soon as possible, and may take the following measures:
1. Order the parties to give supplementary statements on the contents of preparatory pleadings, to submit documentary evidence and relevant physical evidence, and if necessary, inform the parties of deadlines and the effects of abridgment of rights.
2. Request organizations or public legal persons to provide relevant documents or other official information.
3. Order the parities to appear in person.
4. Notify witnesses and expert witnesses, as claimed by either of the parties, to be present on the date of the oral argument session.
5. Invite the labor mediation committee members to participate in consultation.
The court should advise both parties when it takes any action described inthe preceding measures.
For labor cases that arise due to a violation of the provisions of Article 12 of the Act of Gender Equality in Employment, after weighing and considering the details of the incident, the physical and mental condition and the wish of the workers, the court may, if it deems appropriate, order the hearingnot be held in public, or adopt seclusion measures by using shades or video equipment.

To uphold thesubstantialfairness in labor case trials, the court shall elucidate necessary facts provided by the parties, and may investigate essential evidenceon its own initiative.
If the workerand the employer adopt the form contract as the contract of evidence, and the said contract is obviously unfair, theworker is not bound by such a contract.

When the court hears a labor case, it may consider the facts, evidence and information, dispositions, or appropriate case-resolution proposalsinvestigated by mediatorsassigned by the authority, by a composed committee, or a labor mediation committee of the court.
In the scenario, as mentioned in the preceding paragraph, parties involved should be affordedan opportunity to respond.

For cases that are petitioned by workers, the employer is obligated to provide documentation as prescribedin the provisions of the relevant laws.

If the holder of documents, objects to be inspected, or information required for examination, defies a court order to produce the said objects without justifiable reason, the court may rule to impose a fine of up to thirty thousand New Taiwan Dollars. If necessary, the court may also rule to ordercompulsorymeasures.
The provisions relating to the Enforcement Pertaining to Claims for the Delivery of Things as prescribedin the Compulsory Enforcement Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to the enforcement of the compulsory measures as described in the preceding paragraph.
The ruling, as described in the first paragraph, may beappealed; the execution of the ruling that imposes a fine should be stayed,pending such appeal.
In order for the court to determine whether the holder of documents, objects to be inspected, or information required for examination, as described in the first paragraph, has a justifiable reason for not providing, the court may still order the holder to providethe said information or objectsin a private manner, if necessary.
When a party defies the order as described in the first paragraph without a justifiable reason, the court may deem that the fact to which such evidence should attest to betrue.

In wage disputes between workers and employers, if it can be provedthat the workerreceived payments from the employer based on a working relationship, the remuneration is presumed to be paid for the work performed.

It is presumed that the work hours recorded on the worker's time sheetindicates that the worker has performed duties with the employer's permission during the aforementioned hours.

Fora labor case filed by a worker andin whichthe court decides to order the employer to perform a certain action or non-action, the court mayalso order the employer to pay additional compensation, as determined by the court, if the employer fails to comply with the order within a certain period of time after the judgment is finalized.
The provisions of Paragraph 2, Article 222 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure shall apply mutatis mutandis to the preceding paragraph, concerning the determination of compensationby the court.
If the situation, as described in the first paragraph, has passed the designated time specified by the court, the worker may not file a motion forcompulsory execution of the specific acts or of prohibiting specific acts.

A labor union may, within the scope of its purpose as described in its charter, initiate alawsuit prohibiting specific acts against the employer who infringes upon the interests of a majority of its members.
A lawyer should be retained for a lawsuit described in the preceding paragraph.
If a labor union files a lawsuit that violates the interests of its members, the court shall rule to reject the suit.
The withdrawal, abandonment or settlement of the lawsuit, as described in the first paragraph, shall be subject to the approval of the court.
The remuneration for a lawyer as mentioned in the second paragraph is part of the litigation costs, and its maximum amount should be defined. The payment standards should be determined by the Judicial Yuan, after considering the opinions of the Ministry of Justice and Taiwan Bar Association.
The provisions of the preceding four paragraphs shall apply mutatis mutandis to the mediation procedures of the event as described in the first paragraph.

When the labor union is appointed to initiate an action for its members pursuant to Paragraph 1, Article 44-1 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure, the appointed person(s) may file additional claims before the end of oral arguments in the first instance trial, and request a declaratory judgment confirming the existence of the common basis prerequisites concerning claimand legal relationship between the appointing persons and the defendant.
Concerning the additional claim, as described in the preceding paragraph, the court should give priority to conducting the argument and adjudication; before the adjudication concerning the additional claim is finalized, the original litigation proceedings may be stayedby the court.
There will be no additional court costs concerning the additional claims as described in the first paragraph.
The appointed person filing the additional claim, as described in the preceding paragraph, is limited to one time only.

When the appointed person files the additional claim, pursuant to the provisions of the first paragraphthe preceding Article, the court may seek the consent of the appointed person, or the appointed person may file a motion to which the court deems appropriate, and then make public announcements to notify other workers, who share the common interests based on the same cause, that they may submit pleadingregarding their requests, including the following information, within a certain period of time, to join the case:
1. The person petitioning for joining the case, the defendant, and the legal representative;
2. The case number to which they wish to join;
3. The claim and theoccurrence giving rise to such claim, and evidence;
4. The demand for judgment for the relief sought.
Other workers of common interests may also petition to the court for public announcements, pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph.
The person petitioning for joining the aforementioned case pursuant to the provisions of the first paragraph shall be deemed to have appointed the appointed person(s).
The appointed person, within thirty days after the judgment for the additional claim is finalized as described in the first paragraph of the preceding Article, shall submit a pleadingdeclaring all claims that are to be adjudicated on behalf of all the appointing persons, and pay the court costs pursuant to the law.
In the case of the preceding paragraph, the person petitioning for joining the case shall be deemed having initiated the action at the time of petitioning for joining.
The provisions of Article 44-2 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure shall apply mutatis mutandis to the joinder petition procedures, unless this Act stipulates otherwise.
If the appointed party, as described in the first paragraph, refuses to give consent, the court may make public announcementson its own initiative, to notify other workers of common interests to file otherlawsuits for the court to consolidate the actions.

After deducting necessary litigation expenses from the compensation gained from the lawsuit, as describedin Article 44-1 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure and the preceding Article, the labor union should deliver the balance to the appointingworkers, or the workersdeemedappointing, and shall not request remuneration.

On behalf of workers' requests for compensation, the court shall declare the provisional execution on its own initiative, when delivering the judgment against an employer.
In the case of the preceding paragraph, the court shall declare at the same time that the employer mayprovide security or lodge the subject of the claim to avoid provisional execution.
The provisions of the preceding two paragraphs shall apply mutatis mutandis to actions initiated by the labor union pursuant to Article 44-1 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure, and Article 42 of this Act.

If a worker objects to the judgment made on a case that was initiated in accordance with Article 44-1 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure, and Article 42 of this Act, and withdraws the appointment prior to the expiration of the labor union's appeal period, the worker may file an appeal himself/herself in accordance with the applicable laws.
Upon receiving the judgment, the labor union should notify the workers of the verdict immediately, and should notify the workers in writing within sevendays, concerning its decision regarding whether to file an appeal.
Multiple workers with common interests, who were not able to join a labor union during their employment, pursuant to the Labor Union Act, may jointly select a confederated labor union as the appointed party to initiate a lawsuit. However, the aforementionedaction must be within the scope of the appointed confederated labor union's purpose described in its charter, and located in the area where its labor services are provided, or the employer's domicile, residence, main business, or main office is within the demarcation of its organizational area.
Multiple workers with common interests, who weremembers of the same labor union when leaving their jobs or retiring, may appoint the said labor union, if it is within the scope of the said union's purpose as described in its charter, as the appointed party to initiate the lawsuit.
The provisions of Article 44-1 Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure, and the provisions of this Act concerning a labor union initiating lawsuits as an appointed party for its members pursuant to the provisions of Article 44-1 Paragraph 1 of the Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure shall apply mutatis mutandis to the legal actions mentioned in the third and the fourth paragraphs.