4 July, 2018
The IP Court indicated in its Judgement 106-Hsing-Chua-Su-Tze No. 32 that when the invalidation petitioner is the third party intervener, the intervener is a substantial party and will be bond by the judgement.
If the intervener is not allowed to present new evidence, the intervener will have to institute an invalidation petition separately, resulting in multiple litigations.
Based on the principle of uniformity in dispute resolution, the intervener who is the invalidation petitioner should be allowed to submit new evidence for the same ground of invalidation before the end of oral arguments.
This will protect the party’s litigation rights. It is noted that the Supreme Administrative Court has yet to reach a unified view on the situation.
For further information, please contact:
Jennifer Lin, Partner, Tsar & Tsai Law Firm
jenniferLin@TsarTsai.com.tw
