Labor Incident Act Article 36
This English translation was last updated on 2018-12-05, but the Chinese text was amended on 2023-12-15. Later amendments may not be reflected in the translation — please refer to the Chinese text.
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.
中文原文 勞動事件法第36條
文書、勘驗物或鑑定所需資料之持有人，無正當理由不從法院之命提出者，法院得以裁定處新臺幣三萬元以下罰鍰；於必要時並得以裁定命為強制處分。
前項強制處分之執行，準用強制執行法關於物之交付請求權執行之規定。
第一項裁定，得為抗告；處罰鍰之裁定，抗告中應停止執行。
法院為判斷第一項文書、勘驗物或鑑定所需資料之持有人有無不提出之正當理由，於必要時仍得命其提出，並以不公開方式行之。
當事人無正當理由不從第一項之命者，法院得認依該證物應證之事實為真實。
前項強制處分之執行，準用強制執行法關於物之交付請求權執行之規定。
第一項裁定，得為抗告；處罰鍰之裁定，抗告中應停止執行。
法院為判斷第一項文書、勘驗物或鑑定所需資料之持有人有無不提出之正當理由，於必要時仍得命其提出，並以不公開方式行之。
當事人無正當理由不從第一項之命者，法院得認依該證物應證之事實為真實。