Court Organization Act Article 51-8

This English translation was last updated on 2024-11-29, but the Chinese text was amended on 2026-05-13. Later amendments may not be reflected in the translation — please refer to the Chinese text.

When adjudicating legal disputes, the Civil Grand Chamber or the Criminal Grand Chamber, should conduct the oral arguments.The parties, other than the prosecutor, shall retain a lawyer as the agent or defense attorney to perform oral arguments, as mentioned in the preceding paragraph. The provisions of paragraph 3 of Article 474 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall apply mutatis mutandis to the hiring of agents ad litem for civil cases. If the accused in a criminal case has not retained a defense attorney, the presiding judge shall appoint a public defender or attorney to perform oral arguments for the accused.On the date of oral arguments, as referred to in the first paragraph, if the appellee of a civil case has not retained an agent ad litem, or the agent ad litem of one of the parties is not present, adjudication shall be decided after the agent ad litem of the other party makes their statements. If the agents ad litem of both parties are not present, the oral arguments will not be conducted. This provision applies when the defense attorney of the accused, in a criminal case, is not present, or private prosecutor of one of the parties is, or both parties, are not present.When the Civil Grand Chamber or the Criminal 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 had a delegation or cooperation relationship with the parties, interested parties, or their agents, or defense attorneys.2. Whether or not, during the preparation or submission of relevant professional opinions or information, they have received monetary remuneration, or assistance, or its equivalent price or value, from the parties, interested parties, or their agents, or defense attorneys.3. The identities of other people who provided monetary remuneration or assistance, and its price or value.
中文原文 法院組織法第51-8條
民事大法庭、刑事大法庭裁判法律爭議,應行言詞辯論。
前項辯論,檢察官以外之當事人應委任律師為代理人或辯護人為之。
於民事事件委任訴訟代理人,準用民事訴訟法第四百七十四條第三項之規定;於刑事案件被告未選任辯護人者,審判長應指定公設辯護人或律師為被告行言詞辯論。
第一項之辯論期日,民事事件被上訴人未委任訴訟代理人或當事人一造之訴訟代理人未到場者,由他造之訴訟代理人陳述後為裁定;兩造之訴訟代理人均未到場者,得不行辯論。
刑事案件被告之辯護人、自訴代理人中一造或兩造未到場者,亦同。
民事大法庭、刑事大法庭認有必要時,得依職權或依當事人、其代理人或辯護人之聲請,就專業法律問題選任專家學者,以書面或於言詞辯論時到場陳述其法律上意見。
前項陳述意見之人,應揭露下列資訊:
一、相關專業意見或資料之準備或提出,是否與當事人、關係人或其代理人或辯護人有分工或合作關係。
二、相關專業意見或資料之準備或提出,是否受當事人、關係人或其代理人或辯護人之金錢報酬或資助及其金額或價值。
三、其他提供金錢報酬或資助者之身分及其金額或價值。

English translation for reference only; the Chinese text prevails. Not legal advice.