1. Foreword

 
In recent years, the society has constantly changed its shape, with the industrial and commercial sectors developing at a tremendous speed. Land demand is greatly increasing, leading to disputes in connection with the disposition, alteration and encumbrance of jointly owned land or constructional improvements. Land registration agents have encountered particularly more such legal problems than others being confronted with by their clients. In order to deal with problems of this type, the average relevant businesses must spend time and efforts into gathering pertinent information to get the answers. Although this is one of the solutions, most people, after all, do not have sufficient time to collect more full and complete materials for such study. In view of this, I have made some arrangement of the materials dealing with this issue as contained in Taiwan Land Law as authored by myself, publishing them one after another in the Journals of the Associations of Land Registration Agents in several counties/cities. As President Hsiung Lin of Taiwan Land Association was aware of this Article, he approached me and asked if I would surrender it to him so that he could make a separate single edition out of it. On one hand, it could be used as a training material; on the other hand, the copies might be given to the relevant industries for their reference. I have felt entirely honored for this, and also greatly appreciated President Lin's devotion to the Association's affairs.
 

2. Analysis of the Legal Requisites of Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules

 
Article 34-1 provides: "For jointly owned land or constructional improvements, the disposition, alteration and creation of such rights as superficies, yung-tien (permanent tenancy), servitude or tien(pawn) thereof, shall not be carried on unless a majority of the co-owners and of the total shares thereof so agree; provided, however, that the number of co-owners shall be disregarded if such number of shares exceeds two thirds of the total thereof. A co-owner who wishes to proceed with such disposition, alteration or creation of encumbrances pursuant to the preceding paragraph, shall issue a prior notice in writing to the other co-owners, provided that he or she shall make a public announcement regarding the same if written notification is not feasible. The co-owners as referred toin Paragraph I shall be jointly and severally liable for the repayment of the price or compensation payable to other co-owners.  When registering such alteration of right(s), the proof that other co-owners have accepted such repayment or that lodgment of such repayment has been made shall be surrendered. If any real property right is obtained therefore, application for registration shall be filed on other co-owners' behalf. If and when one co-owner sells his or her share, other co-owners have the preemptive right to jointly or severally purchase such share at an identical price.  The preceding four praphs shall apply mutatis mutandis to ownership-in-common. For those jointly owned land or constructional improvements which may be partitioned or otherwise disposed of pursuant to law, but which cannot be partitioned or disposed of by co-owners through their own agreement, any co-owner may petition the land authorities-in-charge of the relevant municipality or county for their mediation; if the mediation fails, the land authorities-in-charge may remove the matter to the proper judicial authorities upon any co-owner's petition."' The foregoing paragraphs will be explained one after another as follows:
 
1.Conditions for the disposition of jointly owned land:
(1)The first part of Paragraph I of the Taiwan Land Rules provides: "For jointly owned land or constructional improvements, the disposition, alteration and creation of such right as servitude, permanent tenancy, easement or pawn thereof, shall not be carried on unless a majority of the co-owners and of the total shares thereof so agree.'' As such, with respect to the disposition, alteration and creation of encumbrances of jointly owned land or  construction structures,  the provision that" a unanimous approval from all co-owners shall be obtained" as contained in Paragraph II, Article 819 of the Civil Code shall not be applied except for such conduct as the creation of mortgages. In other words, only the consent from a majority of the co-owners and of the total shares thereof is required.
(2)The provisory clause of Paragraph I sets forth: "provided, however, that the number of co-owners shall be disregarded if such number of shares exceeds two thirds of the total thereof.' This means that the jointly owned land or constructional improvements may still be disposed of, changed and encumbrances upon the same be created even if the number of co-owners does not reach the majority thereof.
 
2.Notification to other co-owners or public announcement:
 
Despite the provision of the preceding paragraph barring the applicability of the said Civil Code provision that requires the unanimous approval of all co-owners as far as the disposition, alteration or creation of encumbrances of jointly owned land or constructional improvements are concerned, such real property still belongs to the co-owners as a whole. The rights and interests of the other co-owners must also be protected and safeguarded by informing them of the disposition of the jointly owned object. Hence the first part of Paragraph II of this Article provides: “A co-owner who wishes to proceed with such disposition, alteration or creation of encumbrances pursuant to the preceding paragraph, shall issue a prior notice in writing to the other co-owners.” Although the more frequently seen problem regarding the disposition of jointly owned land or constructional improvements is the conflict of opinions among co-owners. However, it is not unusual that some co-owners cannot be reached due to their unknown
whereabouts and uncertain addresses. Therefore, for the purpose of remedying the insufficiency of notice, the second half of this Paragraph further provides: "he or she shall make a public announcement regarding the same if written notification is not feasible."
 
3.The protection of other co-owners' rights and interests;
(1)The first part of Paragraph III of this Article sets forth: “The co-owners as referred to in Paragraph I shall be jointly and severally liable for the repayment of the price or compensation payable to other co-owners."
(2)The middle part of the same paragraph provides: “When registering such alteration of right (s), the proof that other co-owners have accepted such repayment or that lodgment of such repayment has been made shall be surrendered." This is to demonstrate that the price has been paid to other co-owners or put into lodgment pursuant to law. Additionally, the bottom share of the same paragraph specifies: “If any real property right is obtained therefore, application for registration shall be filed on other co-owners' behalf.” Other co-owners' rights are thereby safeguarded and disputes among the co-owners precluded.
 
4.The preemptive right to purchase jointly owned land:
(1)Each co-owner may freely dispose of his or her share of jointly owned land or constructional structures, which is unambiguously set forth in Paragraph 1, Article 819 of the Civil Code. Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules provides: “If and when one co-owner sells his or her share, other co-owners have the preemptive right to jointly or severally purchase such share at an identical price.” This paragraph merely applies to such disposition as sale. The legislative intent was to prevent the share of the co-owner from falling onto the hands of a stranger. The preemptive right to purchase the co-owner's shares is thus vested with other co-owners so as to reduce the number of co-owners to the fullest extent possible, thereby facilitating the management, use and disposition of jointly owned land. Such preemptive right is a de jure preemptive right to purchase (despite its mere nature of right of obligation), endowing identical rights among all other co-owners. It is consistent with the law regardless of the number of purchaser(s) being one or more of such other co- owners. If there are more than one purchaser, all such purchasers shall jointly exercise the preemptive right to purchase according to their respective previous ratios or shares. It is deemed to be applicable to the sequestration or auctioning conducted by the court as to the shares of jointly owned land or constructional structures as the interpretation so requires. If any other co-owner(s) wish to dispose of the jointly owned land or constructional structures in its entirety in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph I of this Article, he or she shall notify the other co-owners of his or her share and inquire if they are willing to preemptively purchase the same. Those co-owners who do not consent to the disposition have the preemptive right to jointly or severally purchase such share at an identical price pursuant to this paragraph, allowing the jointly owned land to remain in the hands of previous co-owners. The object to be purchased is the share belonging to the co-owner, but not all of the jointly
owned land. In cases where co-owners sell their shares to each other, the preceding
provisions do not apply.
(2)With respect to the co-owners' preemptive right to purchase as set forth in this Article, no similar provisions exist here as do the second half of Paragraph II, Article 104 of the Taiwan Land Rules and Paragraph III, Article 15 of the Statute for the Three-Seven-Five Reduction of Rents for Cultivated Land, Nor is there any clear provision authorizing such to be applied mutatis mutandis, thus precluding it from being interpreted as the restive existence contained in those two articles. The preemptive right as set forth in this Articles is a right to request the entry into of sales contract whose exercise is premised on the effective existence of conducts of purchase and sale as between a co-owner and a third party. In addition, the provision of Article 125 of the Civil Code will apply that such right shall extinguish if not exercised within fifteen years. Therefore it is merely a right under the principles of obligations and the privity exists among co-owners without the force and effect as against any third party. Therefore, if a co-owner did not seek to inquire the other co-owners about their willingness to preemptively purchase when selling his or her share, but instead executed a sales contract with a third party and completed the registration of alteration of rights regarding land, such registration shall be considered good. Other co-owners may merely seek damages through judicial channels in accordance with Article 226 of the Civil Code.
(3)On October 21, 1975, The Ministry of the Interior issued a letter (Tai-Nei-Ti-657006),
saying: “For any land where any constructional structure already exists and such structure is owned by several owners, if any owner selling his or her share thereof also sells the relevant share of the building site where the structure is situated to the same buyer, the legislative  spirit of Article 104 of the Taiwan Land Rules to make a unity of the ownership of the building site and houses on the surface thereof shall leave other co-owners of the building  site without the preemptive right to purchase.” Accordingly, the preemptive right to purchase as set forth in this paragraph shall be applicable to non-leased jointly owned farmland, jointly owned building site where no structures exist on the surface thereof or the situation where constructional structures and the building site thereof belong to the same co-owners. For any land where any constructional structure already exists and such structure is owned by several owners, if any owner selling his or her share thereof also sells the relevant share of the building site to the same buyer, or if the joint lessees of a farmland sells his or her share, the provisions of this Article shall not be applicable so that the constitutional policy of fostering self-cultivating landowners and those who use land by themselves can be carried through. In other words, if the preemptive right to purchase as set forth in this Article concurs with the preemptive right to purchase as specified in Article 104 or Article 107 of the Taiwan Land Rules, under the principles that the rights over things predominates the rights under obligations and that a land user has a preemptive right to acquire land-related rights, the provisions of Article 104 or Article 107 shall take precedence that the lessee shall have the preemptive right to purchase.
 
5.Applicability to ownership-in-common:
The preceding four paragraphs refer to joint ownership. It may also be applicable to ownership-in common, however. Hence paragraph V of this Article provides: “The preceding four paragraphs shall apply mutatis mutandis to ownership-in-common."
 
6.Mediation with respect to the partitioning of jointly owned land:
In order to facilitate the resolution of land-related disputes among co-owners, and to promote the use of land, Paragraph VI of this Article is set forth as follows: "For those jointly owned land or constructional improvements which may be partitioned or otherwise disposed of pursuant to law, but which cannot be partitioned or disposed of by co-owners through their own agreement,any co-owner may petition the land authorities-in-charge of the relevant municipality or county for their mediation; if the mediation fails, the land authorities-in-charge may remove the matter tothe proper judicial authorities upon any co-owner's petition.” Namely, matters of the sort may go through the mediation procedure conducted by the land authorities-in-charge of the relevant municipality or county both for the convenience of the people and for the purpose of reducing caseload. If the mediation should fail, the matter would then go to the court for resolution.
 

3. Applicability and Research in Practice

 
1.How to distinguish between Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 and Paragraph II, Article 104 of the Taiwan Land Rules?
 
(1)Unlike the bottom part of Paragraph II, Article 104 of the Taiwan Land Rules, which clearly provides that the sales contract between the seller and a third person will not stand against a person who has the preemptive right to purchase if the seller did not notify such person, Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 thereof merely sets forth that if and when one co-owner sells his or her share, other co-owners have the preemptive right to jointly or severally purchase such share at an identical price. As such, the preemptive right to purchase as set forth in this Article refers to the right of other co-owners to request the co-owner for the entry into of sales contract on the same terms as are offered to any other person in cases where such co-owner wishes to sell jointly owned land or constructional improvements. If such co-owner does not comply with the law by selling his or her share to a third person who has obtained ownership thereof pursuant to law, other co-owners may not disclaim the validity of suchsales and cancel the registration which was done according to law.
 
(2)The preemptive right to purchase as mentioned in Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules is a right under the principles of obligations. This can be ascertained by looking into the different languages employed in this Article and those in Paragraph II, Article 104 of the same Rules and in Paragraph III, Article 15 of the Statute for the Three-Seven-Five Reduction of Rents for Cultivated Land. Since the appellees have completed the registration for the transfer of ownership as between themselves for the sale of the share(s) of the land at issue, the appellant's claim that such registration of transfer of ownership should be canceled and that such share(s) be sold to him and registered under his name, based on the preemptive right to purchase as set forth in Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules, shall not be granted.
 
(3)Although other co-owners may preemptively purchase a co-owner's share at the same price in accordance with Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules when the co-owner sells his or her share, such right is merely a right under the principles of obligations, but not  one that has the relative effect of rights over things as that of a lessee of a parcel of land for the construction of a house when the less or offers his or her land
 
2.Which shall prevail when Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 and Paragraph II. Article 104 of the Taiwan Land Rules coincide with each other?
 
(1)Article 104 of the Taiwan Land Rules merely provides that a lessee has the preemptive right to purchase the building site on the same terms as are offered to any other person when it is offered for sale. It does not limit the lessee's preemptive right to purchase the jointly owned building site to the situation where all of the co-owners wish to sell. If it so limits, the lessee will not be able to gain ownership of the building site when co-owners of such site sell their respective shares severally or one after another, thereby defeating the intent of Article 104 of the Taiwan Land Rules. Therefore, if one of the co-owners of a leased jointly owned building site sells his or her share, the lessee of such building site shall  have the preemptive right to purchase it on the same terms as are offered to any other person. The lessee's preemptive right to purchase also prevails over that of other co-owners as set forth in Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the same Rules.
 
(2)It should be noted that the legislative objective of the preemptive right to purchase under Paragraph I, Article 104 of the amended Taiwan Land Rules is to avoid the separation of land ownership and land use. If the provision thereof is violated, the sales contract shall not be used as against the person with the preemptive right to purchase under the provision of Paragraph II of the same article. In contrast, the preemptive right of other co-owners to purchase as set forth in Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the same Rules simply denotes the rights and obligations as between co-owners, which does not have the force to stand against any third party. It is clear that the former has a stronger effect than the latter. Furthermore, the existing land policy of avoiding fractional remainders of land and the dispersion of land ownership concerns farmland and vacant land. If a third person has already built a house on the surface of the land, it will be unnecessary to protect a co-owner of the building site by affording him or her the preemptive right to purchase the shares of other co-owners. It will, therefore, be consistent with the legislative intent only if the preemptive right to purchase as set forth in Paragraph I, Article 104 of the Taiwan Land Rules is considered to prevail over aco-owner's preemptive right to purchase.
 
(3)The legislation of the preemptive right to purchase as set forth in Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules is not only focused on the prevention of disintegration of land, but also on the elimination of ownership so as to facilitate the maximal utility of land. It, therefore, merely has the effect of obligations. As for the preemptive right to purchase provided for in Paragraph I, Article 104 thereof as between a superficiary and owner of a building site. Paragraph II of the same article identifies it as having the effect end of a quasi-right over things. In addition, Paragraph 1, Article 104 thereof does not limit the claim of a superficiary to exercise the preemptive right to purchase a jointly owned building site to the mere situation where all of the co-owners sell their shares. If and when it coincides with the co-owner's
preemptive right to purchase as set forth in Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 thereof, the latest opinion of the Court indicates that a superficiary's preemptive right to purchase ought to prevail.
 
3.Whether Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules encompasses the
sale of the jointly owned property as a whole under Paragraph I?
 
(1)If co-owners A and B sold all of the jointly owned land to D pursuant to Paragraph I, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules, the other co-owner, C, may claim his preemptive right to purchase under Paragraph IV of the same article. Although co-owners A and B sold all of the jointly owned land under Paragraph I thereof, it was still considered a sale of their respective shares for each co-owner. They merely have the right to dispose of C's share on C's behalf, but does not thereby deprive C of his preemptive right to purchase.
 
(2)Although Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules provides that the disposition of a jointly owned land shall be conducted through the consent of a majority of the co-owners and of the total shares thereof, Paragraph III thereof further provides: “The co-owners as referred to in Paragraph I shall be jointly and severally liable for the repayment of the price or compensation payable to other co-owners. When registering such alteration of right(s), the proof that other co-owners have accepted such repayment or that lodgment of such repayment has been made shall be surrendered. If any real property right is obtained therefor, application for registration shall be filed on other co-owners' behalf.” Hence it is obvious that the co-owner who disposed of the land was merely disposing of his or her own right with respect to his or her share. As for the disposition of the shares of the other co-owners, it is an act of agency authorized under the law, the nature of which is an act of disposition on the behalf of other co-owners. Therefore, the law says that the co-owner shall be jointly and severally liable for the repayment of the price or compensation payable to other co-owners, and that registration shall be filed on other co-owners' behalf. In the case at issue, just as A and B had sold their own shares, the fact that A and B sold out all of the land makes no difference for C. Naturally, C may claim his preemptive right to purchase it alone. Furthermore, the intent of the amended Taiwan Land Rules is to eliminate the system of joint ownership and to improve the utility of land use. Since C's claim of his preemptive right to purchase the land is not inconsistent with the said intent, it shall be granted.
 
4.Whether Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules encompass owners' shares between or among themselves?
Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules provides that if and when one co-owner sells his or her share, other co-owners have the preemptive right to jointly or severally purchase such share at an identical price. Its legislative intent is simply to recognize the preemptive right of other co-owners to purchase a co-owner's share when a third party wishes to buy such share, thereby simplifying the co-ownership. If the co-owners engage in sales between or among themselves, the aforementioned provisions shall not be applicable. Since the respondent is one of the co-owners, his purchase of the shares of Chen A and Chen B in the court where auction procedure
was conducted shall not be obiected to by other co-owners by claiming the preemptive right to purchase.
5.Whether Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules is premised on the effectiveness of the sale between a co-owner and a third party?
 
(1)The exercise of the preemptive right to purchase as set forth in Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules is based on the effective sale of a co-owner's share to a third party. In the event that the sale was of no effect as between the co-owner and the third party or, namely, the sale had never existed from day one, the so-called preemptive right to purchase would not be capable of taking place.
 
(2)The preemptive right to purchase as set forth in Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules is a right under the principles of obligations. It shall be asserted only as to the sale between the seller of the share and the buyer thereof. If the right over things has come about as to the sale of the share due to the registration thereof, other co-owners may no longer claim the existence of the preemptive right to purchase. In addition, the creditor and the rights as set forth in Paragraph II, Article 244 of the Civil Code do not include such other co-owners and the preemptive right to purchase as are provided for in Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules. The preemptive right to purchase is premised upon the existence of the sales. If the sales was canceled and ceased to exist, there would be no preemptive right to purchase for other co-owners.
 
6.What is the effect of the violation of Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules?
 
As far as the preemptive right to purchase is concerned, nothing contained in Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules compares to the bottom part of Paragraph II, Article 104 thereof, which provides: “If the seller enters into a sales contract with a third party without notifying the person having the preemptive right to purchase, such contract may not be used as against the person having such preemptive right.” Hence a co-owner's preemptive" right to purchase only exists as between the co-owners. If a co-owner violated his or her obligation by selling his or her share to a third person and by registering the transfer of ownership, other co-owners may merely claim damages without having the right to disclaiming the validity of the sales contract and requesting the cancellation of such registration as against the buyer.
 
7.With Paragraph IV. Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules providing "If and when one co-owner sells his or her share, other co-owners severally preemptive right to jointly or severally purchase such share at an identical price,” shall a seller (other than at a compulsory auction) notify other co-owners in advance?
 
The seller shall notify other co-owners. The reasons are as follows: (1)Base on the same reason forArticle104 of the Taiwan Land Rules, the duty to notify (with respect to the inquiry if other co-owners wish to preemptively purchase) shall also be imposed upon the sellers as mentioned in thisArticle (Paragraph IV, Article 34-1). Explanations Nos. (1) through (4) of the Letter Tai-Nei-Ti 1657006 as issued by the Ministry of the Interior, dated October 21, 1975, specifies that: “Paragraph II, Article 104 of the Taiwan Land Rules shall apply mutatis mutandis." (2)"The essence of the preemptive right to purchase is to grant a conditional right of creation to the person with such preemptive right. Because of the exercise of such conditional right of creation, there comes into existence a sale between the creditor and debtor on the same terms as exist between the debtor and a third person.” As such, if the seller does not notify other co-owners of the sales conditions between him or her and the third person, it will not be practicable for such other co- owners to exercise their preemptive right to purchase. (3)The purpose of Article 104 of the Taiwan Land Rules is to make the ownership of a house on a building site fall into one hand to the extent possible, thereby avoiding the complication and facilitating the improvement and utility thereof so as to develop socio-economy. Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules shall have the same purpose. (4)By applying mutatis mutandis, it shall refer to the sort of applicability that does not conflict with this Article. For the first part of Paragraph II, Article 104 of the Taiwan Land Rules, which indubitably provides for the deadline for notification and its effect, such applicability should be adequate. For the effect of standing against a third person as set forth in the second half thereof, however, it shall not be applied mutatis mutandis. (5)The Since the Ministry of the Interior is the proper authorities having the power to interpret the Taiwan Land Rules, it is not unsuitable for the Ministry to give supplementary interpretations thereof.
 
8.When the owner of a multi-story building sells his or her unit along with his or share of the jointly owned building site, shall the provision of Article 34-1 of the amended Taiwan Land Rules that “other co-owners have the preemptive right to jointly or severally purchase such share at an identical price” apply?
The purpose of Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules is to eliminate co ownership. A owner of a multi-story building may freely sell his or her unit, and the building site thereof belongs to all of the co-owners of the multi-story building. However, since the building site is not subject to partitioning for the purpose of its use, it is makes no difference from single ownership. Based upon the purpose of such legislation, in interpreting the cases where a owner of a multi-story building sells his or her share of the building site, the preemptive right to purchase as set forth in Article 34-1 of the amended Taiwan Land Rules shall not apply. Reference may be made as to the Ministry of Judicial Administration Letter Tai-(64)-Tsan 09861, dated November 11, 1975, saying : “In cases where a construction structure is already on the surface and the structure belongs to several owners, if any such owner sells his or her unit along with his or her share of the building site where the structure is situated, the legislative intent of Article 104 of the Taiwan Land Rules, i.e., unifying the ownership both of the building site and of the house(s) thereon, requires that other co-owners of the building site have no preemptive right to purchase.”
 
9.In negotiating the partitioning of the jointly owned land, can it be done through the consent of a majority of the co-owners and of the shares thereof?
According to Paragraph 1, Article 824 of the Civil Code, the partitioning of a joint property shall be made in the method mutually agreed upon among the co-owners. An agreement” shall mean the agreement through negotiation made by all of the co-owners, which is different from a “resolution.” Therefore, the doctrine of majority rule shall not be applicable. If the negotiation fails, the court may, upon the petition of any of the co-owners, render a judgment distributing the property in accordance with Paragraph thereof. As such, it is unlikely that the property cannot be partitioned if the co-owners so desire. There is a difference between the situation and the provision of Paragraph I, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules, which rules out the restrictions set forth in the Civil Code with respect to the disposition of the joint property for the sole purpose of promoting the implementation of urban planning, development of socio-economy, as well as the effective use of land. Moreover; Paragraph I only refers to "disposition” while Paragraph VI specifies “partitioning" or "other dispositions.” This, in particular, should be interpreted as having distinguished “partitioning” from other dispositions. Hence the “disposition” referred to in Paragraph I shall mean those acts of disposition other than partitioning. However, the Ministry of the Interior Letter Tai-Nei-Ti-784534, dated May 10,1978, said that the act of sales included in the “disposition of jointly owned land” as set forth in Paragraph I, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules is a high-level act of disposition, which may be conducted through the consent of a majority of the co-owners and of the total shares thereof. Since the partitioning of land is a low-level act of disposition among the “disposition of jointly owned land,” it “shall also be subject to the said Article.” A contrary view was thus presented.
 
10.According to Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the newly promulgated Taiwan Land Rules, when an owner of a real property sells his or her share, other co-owners have the preemptive right to purchase it. What criteria then is the deadline for the claim of such preemptive right based upon? The law does not specify how to determine the person if more than one person declare their intention to preemptively purchase it. How can we deal with it in a lawful and appropriate manner?
Under Paragraph IV, Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules, which provides for
"...an identical price...”, the “identical price” cannot be ascertained until the real property is For this, Theory B is more appropriate. In addition, the same article provides that other co-owners have the preemptive right to jointly or several such share at an identical price.” It appears that there is only one preemptive right to jointly or severally purchase among multiple co-owners. Unless only one of the co-owners is willing to preemptively purchase the share, who may then preemptively purchase it alone, if multiple co-owners declare their intention to preemptively purchase it, it should result in a joint purchase, in principle, under which such co-owners will jointly purchase it according to the ratio of their respective holdings. However, the preemptive right of other co-owners is still subject to the limitations as imposed by applicable laws (e.g., the status of one who has the power of self-cultivation or the preference of a lessee of cultivated land; see Item IV(1) of the Ministry of the Interior Letter Tai-Nei-Ti-657006). Furthermore, the Ministry Letter Min-06864, dated August 8, 1975, as mentioned in Theory A only deals with the issue of notice, but not with the deadline for the determination of the preemptive right to purchase.\
 
IV. Conclusion
 
As given the above, the provision of Article 34-2 with respect to the disposition, alteration and creation of encumbrances of jointly owned land or constructional improvements, is a special provision excluding the applicability of the Civil Code provisions regarding the disposition of joint property. The Civil Code stipulates that the consent of all of the co-owners shall be obtained for the disposition, alteration and creation of encumbrances of joint property. It further provides that in the case of ownership-in-common, the disposition of a property-in-common and the exercise of other rights shall be done through the consent of all of the owners-in-common. However, if the provisions of the Civil Code should also apply to the disposition, alteration or creation of encumbrances made by the co-owner of land, many limitations will be imposed upon such acts because the co-ownership of land often involves a great number of people and the application of the Civil Code provisions will result in inconvenience. Consequently, upon reviewing the amendments to the Taiwan Land Rules, the Legislative Yuan added various provisions as contained in this Article, excluding the general principles of the Civil Code regarding the disposition of joint property to solve the practical problems in connection with the exercise of the rights pertaining to co-ownership of land. It is meant to facilitate the expeditious and effective disposition of the jointly owned land made by the co-owners.
Paragraph II thereof provides that a co-owner shall notify other co-owners in advance when he or she disposes of the joint property. Because the alteration of ownership in real property has a tremendous impact on the rights and interests of other co-owners, it may not be done carelessly   Thus, a public announcement shall be made if notification is not feasible. It is meant t inform other co-owners to the extent possible so as not to harm but to safeguard their rights and interests Paragraph III thereof provides that the rights of other co-owners will not extinguish as a result of the disposition referred to in Paragraph I. Therefore, as a lawful right has been disposed of and thus not recoverable, only the issue of compensation as to other co-owners should arise. In addition, when making such disposition, other co-owners shall receive repayment of the compensatory price or the lodgment of such repayment shall be made. Moreover, with respect to the payment of such price, the co-owners who initiated disposition of the joint property shall be jointly and severally liable therefore so as to preserve the rights of other co-owners regarding the land.
Paragraph IV thereof provides for the other co-owners' preemptive right to purchase. The reasons for giving co-owners such preemptive right to purchase are to minimize the complex relationship resulting from the disposition of joint property, and to promote the convenience of land use.  
*Attorney-at-Law. Published in Chinese by Taiwan Land Association and in Zhong Wang Law Review on June 16, 1998.
1Supreme Court Precedent 67-Tai-Shang-949: “The Taiwan Land Rules nas amended and published for implementation on July 24, 1975. Under the Paragraph I of Article 34-1 thereof, the disposition/change of jointly own be done if a majority of the co-owners and of the total shares thereof so consent. A unanimous approval is not required to do so. The Appellant changed the use jointly owned graveyard and built a house and grew vegetables thereon. Should this happen after the Taiwan Land Rules were amended and the consent from the majority of the co-owners and of the shares thereof was obtained, Paragraph II, Article 12 the Civil Code would not be applicable accordingly.”
2 Supreme Court Precedent 74-Tai-Shang-2561: “The disposition as referred to in Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules does not include such conduct as partitioning. It is not the case that a jointly owned object may be partitioned at will without the unanimous approval of all other co-owners even if the shares as owned by one coowner or the combined shares of several co-owners exceed two thirds."
3 Supreme Court Precedent 68-Tai-Shang-2857: “The duty to notify as set forth in Paragraphs V and II of Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules simply dictates the internal relationship among co-owners whose failure to perform such duty only turns on the question of liability for damages but does not have any impact on the effect of the sale."
4 Key Point No. 10 (10) for the Implementation of Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules.
5 Supreme Court Precedent 49-Tai-Kang-83; Article 102 of the Compulsory Execution Law; and Key Point No. 10 (7) for the Implementation of Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules.
6 Key Point No. 10 (1) for the Implementation of Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules.
7 Resolution of the Twelfth Civil Court Meeting of the Supreme Court dated May 23, 1989. 8 Supreme 8 Supreme Court Ruling 72-Tai-Kang-94.
9 Supreme Court Precedent 65-Tai-Shang-853; Key Point No. 10 (5) for the Implementation of Article 34-1 of the Taiwan Land Rules.
10 Supreme Court Judgment Summary 67-Tai-Shang-2062; Article 83 of the Land