TAIWAN Law and Practice Contributed by: Jui-Hua Fan, Hsiang-Yang Hsieh, Chia-Hsin Wu, Chi-Ying Lee and Jin-Han Hsieh, Formosa Transnational Attorneys At Law
Jin-Han Hsieh is an associate at Formosa Transnational Attorneys at Law. His practice focuses on intellectual property and
administrative litigation. Mr Hsieh graduated from National Taiwan University, Department of Law in 2020. He is a member of the Taipei Bar Association.
Formosa Transnational Attorneys at Law 7F. No 26 Hangzhou N. Rd Taipei City 100010 Taiwan
Tel: +886 2 2755 7366 Fax: +886 2 2755 6486 Email: ftlaw@taiwanlaw.com Web: www.taiwanlaw.com/en/index.php
1. Introduction 1.1 Current Framework for Private Antitrust Litigation Private Enforcement Private enforcement of antitrust law usually proceeds with civil lawsuits initiated by parties injured by alleged violations. Pursuant to Articles 29–33 of the Taiwan - ese Fair Trade Act (TFTA), if an enterprise violates any provision of the TFTA and thereby infringes upon the rights and interests of another, the aggrieved party may seek proper remedies from the civil courts. Avail - able remedies include permanent injunctions requiring the infringing parties to cease the infringing activities, as well as compensatory damages. Ordinary courts have jurisdiction over civil claims sounding in Taiwanese antitrust law. Plaintiffs may go to the IP Court if the subject matter of their claims involves IP issues.
1.2 Recent Developments Taiwan Supreme Court Clarifies Damages Calculation in Comparative Advertising Cases Taiwan’s Supreme Court has recently issued an impor - tant decision clarifying the scope of damages avail - able under the Taiwan Fair Trade Act (TFTA) in cases involving false or misleading comparative advertising. The judgment confirms that an injured business may elect to calculate damages based solely on the prof - its obtained by the infringing party, without proving the amount of its own loss. The decision is expected to strengthen the enforcement of unfair competition claims and may have a significant impact on com - parative advertising practices in Taiwan. Background The dispute arose between two manufacturers of whole-body vertical vibration machines competing in the same market. The plaintiff manufactures and mar - kets a well-known brand of vibration machines (the “A Machines”), while the defendant manufactures com - peting products (the “B Machines”).
189 A NTITRUST LI T IGATI O N 2026
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook