Five items belong in a motion asking a Taiwan court to order an opponent to produce a document. Article 342 of the Code of Civil Procedure requires the document, the fact it should prove, its contents, the reason it is held by the opponent, and the basis for a duty to produce it. Each item answers a different question.
For a US company pursuing a claim against a Taiwan counterparty, the missing record may be central to proving performance or a payment calculation. Start with that disputed fact. A useful preparation note connects it to an identifiable record and explains why the counterparty should have that record. This article concerns documents held by the opposing party in ordinary Taiwan civil proceedings.
The document and the fact to be proved
Knowing that a counterparty maintains records does not identify which record supports the claim. Describe the transaction, period and document type as far as the available information permits. Explain the connection. A court-facing request should distinguish what the document is expected to establish from what the company merely hopes to find.
What if the document's exact name or contents cannot be specified? Article 342 expressly addresses manifest difficulty in identifying the document or stating its contents. In that situation, the court may order the opponent to provide necessary assistance. The provision is discretionary. It does not dispense with explaining the difficulty or the other elements of the motion.
Article 343 requires a production order where the court finds that the fact to be proved is material and that the motion is justified. Those are cumulative requirements. Filing a request does not by itself establish that both are met.
Why the opponent has a duty to produce
Documents held by the other side are not all treated identically. Article 344 lists five categories carrying a production duty: documents that party cited in the proceedings; documents the requester may legally demand or inspect; documents made for the requester's benefit; commercial account books; and documents made concerning matters related to the litigation.
Identify the applicable category. If the request relies on a legal right to inspect a particular document, explain that right rather than assuming that its existence follows from the lawsuit. For company staff collecting instructions for Taiwan counsel, a short note beside each requested record can identify the claimed basis and any supporting material already available.
Privacy and business secrets
Does a confidentiality label settle the request? Article 344(2) allows a qualified refusal for the last of those five categories where the document contains a party's or a third party's privacy or business secrets and disclosure risks substantial harm. The condition is specific. It should not be paraphrased as a universal exemption for everything marked confidential.
The court may, when necessary to assess whether refusal has a proper basis, require production through a non-public procedure. A company's explanation should therefore identify the information concerned and the harm said to follow from disclosure. That preparation does not decide how the court will rule.
Failure to obey an order
Article 345 addresses unjustified failure to comply with a production order. After considering the circumstances, the court may treat the requesting party's assertions about the document or the facts it should prove as true. Before deciding, it must give the parties an opportunity to argue.
The consequence concerns proof. It is not an automatic judgment for every amount claimed. Preserve the request, the order, the stated reason for non-production and the precise factual issue that remains disputed. Those materials keep the later evidentiary argument tied to the document the court actually ordered the opponent to produce.
Official sources
- Code of Civil Procedure, Article 342: motion and required particulars
- Article 343: requirements for a production order
- Article 344: production duties and qualified refusal
- Article 345: unjustified noncompliance and the opportunity to argue
Checked October 14, 2026. This discussion does not cover third-party production, cross-border judicial assistance or the special procedures of Taiwan's commercial court.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What must a motion for an opponent's documents identify?
- Article 342 lists the document, the fact it should prove, its contents, why the opponent holds it and the basis for the opponent's production duty. If identifying the document or its contents is manifestly difficult, the court may order the opponent to provide necessary assistance.
- Can the opponent refuse by calling the document confidential?
- Article 344(2) provides a qualified refusal for the paragraph 1(5) category: privacy or business secrets whose disclosure risks substantial harm. The court may require non-public production when necessary to decide whether the refusal has a proper basis. A confidentiality label alone does not resolve that inquiry.
- Does refusal to produce automatically make the requesting company win?
- Under Article 345, unjustified noncompliance with a production order can allow the court to treat the requesting party's document-related allegations or facts to be proved as true, after considering the circumstances. The parties must have an opportunity to argue before the decision. It is not an automatic victory on the whole claim.
This article provides general information and is not legal advice on any individual matter.
