| 英文摘要 |
Taiwan has a massive trade surplus with the U.S. Thus, the legal controversies become inevitable along with the frequent exchange of commerce and international trade. Among them, the“Punitive damages”judgments rendered by the U.S. courts have led to problems of recognition and enforcement in Taiwan due to the totally different legislation system, several determining elements contradicting“the principle of indemnity,”and the great sum of compensation passed by the jury. Meanwhile, the disputes over this issue between the Supreme Court and scholars continue challenging the place of civil law and special laws. Hence, this article aims at organizing, analyzing and categorizing the distinct attitudes of judgments and scholars’, in an effort to look into the reasoning bases behind them.
This article will first introduce the four major functions of punitive damages in the U.S., along with the legislation goals and common types in practical terms, followed by comparing the punitive damages in the U.S. with the compensation system of civil law in Taiwan. Next, the article will explain the definition and applications of“public policy and morals”, together with the difference between judgments and scholars’opinions. Third, the article will categorize the relevant and critical judgments in Taiwan so as to disclose the practical perspectives of how the internal public policy and morals are commenced in the recognition and enforcement process. Moreover, the article will demonstrate the blind spots of the Supreme Court and the possible logical flaws in the judgments. Last, from the perspectives of international conventions, legislation goal of civil law, the re-examination of public policy and morals, and the utility of foreign final and binding judgments, this article suggests courts in Taiwan recognize and enforce the“U.S. punitive damages judgments”in a broader way with appropriate application principles. Thereby, a more delicate and precise method of examination can be established for the Supreme Court to resolve this long-standing issue in a practical view. |
