Family Act Article 31
This English translation was last updated on 2012-01-11, but the Chinese text was amended on 2023-06-21. Later amendments may not be reflected in the translation — please refer to the Chinese text.
Where both parties have appeared on the date designated for the mediation session but the mediation did not yield a settlement, the court may, upon motion by one of the parties, order the case to be continued with the adjudicative procedure appropriate for the nature of the subject-matters; in such a circumstance the case shall be deemed to be brought to the court for adjudication from the date when the initiation for mediation was made. Nonetheless, the motion for postponement of the date for court session made by the other party shall be granted.Where a mediation brought by the parties by agreement did not yield a settlement, and when a applicant initiates the action within a peremptory period of ten day following the service of an unsuccessful mediation, such an action shall be deemed to be brought to the court for adjudication from the date when the initiation for mediation was made; the same applies to a request for application of the adjudicative procedure made prior to the service of an unsuccessful mediation.With regard to a situation where a party’s initiation of an action is deemed to be an initiation for mediation, where the mediation did not yield a settlement, except where the parties motion for postponement of the date for court session, the court shall order the case to be continued with the adjudicative procedure appropriate for the nature of the subject-matters. In such a circumstance, the case shall be deemed to be brought to the court for adjudication from the date when the original initiation of the action was made.Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of this Article do not apply to a situation where there exists a ruling done in accordance with Article 33 or Article 36.Representations or concessions made by the parties in the mediation proceedings may not be admitted as the basis for making a decision over an action initiated as a result of an unsuccessful mediation.Where representations or concessions provided in the preceding paragraph have resulted in a written agreement on the subject matters of the proceeding, the facts of the case, the evidence or other matters that are subject to the parties’ own disposition, the parties shall be bound by the agreement so reached. The foregoing does not apply to circumstances under which the parties agree on amending the said agreement, there exist reasons not imputable to the parties, or there are other circumstances that render such an agreement manifestly unfair.
中文原文 家事事件法第31條
當事人兩造於調解期日到場而調解不成立者,法院得依一造當事人之聲請,按該事件應適用之程序,命即進行裁判程序,並視為自聲請調解時已請求裁判。
但他造聲請延展期日者,應許可之。
當事人聲請調解而不成立,如聲請人於調解不成立證明書送達後十日之不變期間內請求裁判者,視為自聲請調解時已請求裁判;其於送達前請求裁判者亦同。
以裁判之請求視為調解之聲請者,如調解不成立,除當事人聲請延展期日外,法院應按該事件應適用之程序,命即進行裁判程序,並仍自原請求裁判時,發生程序繫屬之效力。
前三項情形,於有第三十三條或第三十六條所定之聲請或裁定者,不適用之。
調解程序中,當事人所為之陳述或讓步,於調解不成立後之本案裁判程序,不得採為裁判之基礎。
前項陳述或讓步,係就程序標的、事實、證據或其他事項成立書面協議者,如為得處分之事項,當事人應受其拘束。
但經兩造同意變更,或因不可歸責於當事人之事由或依其他情形協議顯失公平者,不在此限。
但他造聲請延展期日者,應許可之。
當事人聲請調解而不成立,如聲請人於調解不成立證明書送達後十日之不變期間內請求裁判者,視為自聲請調解時已請求裁判;其於送達前請求裁判者亦同。
以裁判之請求視為調解之聲請者,如調解不成立,除當事人聲請延展期日外,法院應按該事件應適用之程序,命即進行裁判程序,並仍自原請求裁判時,發生程序繫屬之效力。
前三項情形,於有第三十三條或第三十六條所定之聲請或裁定者,不適用之。
調解程序中,當事人所為之陳述或讓步,於調解不成立後之本案裁判程序,不得採為裁判之基礎。
前項陳述或讓步,係就程序標的、事實、證據或其他事項成立書面協議者,如為得處分之事項,當事人應受其拘束。
但經兩造同意變更,或因不可歸責於當事人之事由或依其他情形協議顯失公平者,不在此限。