Administrative litigation concerning the Magang fishing village settlement complex
Case Story
Residents of Magang Fishing Village in Gongliao District, New Taipei City, have filed an administrative lawsuit against the New Taipei City Government. The case stems from the acquisition of land belonging to a conglomerate that houses the village’s unique century-old stone houses and the settlement of female divers, leaving residents facing the prospect of having their houses demolished and the land returned to them. To protect their home and preserve the precious stone house settlement in the northeast corner of the island, the residents applied to the New Taipei City Government to register the fishing village as a cluster of architectural buildings, but the competent authority refused the application. The plaintiffs argue that the settlement demonstrates the ingenuity of craftsmanship adapted to the marine environment, and that local residents have the legal right to request registration as cultural assets; therefore, the New Taipei City Government’s refusal to register the settlement is illegal. The residents are therefore requesting the court to overturn the decision and order the government to register the cluster of architectural buildings to ensure the preservation of the entire Magang Fishing Village area.
Plaintiff
Residents of Magang Fishing Village
Appointed attorney
Attorneys Huang Xinwen and Luo Fangchen
Defendant
New Taipei City Government
Interventor
Good Fish Field Co., Ltd.
Where is the case currently progressing?
In June 2025, the case was won in the Supreme Administrative Court, and the case was remanded to the Taipei High Administrative Court for retrial (second instance).
Previous instance proceedings:
In July 2020, the case was won in the Taipei High Administrative Court.The New Taipei City Government appealed, and in August 2022, the Supreme Administrative Court overturned the original judgment and remanded the case.
In September 2023, the Taipei High Administrative Court, in its first instance retrial, reversed the original judgment and ruled against the New Taipei City Government.The New Taipei City Government appealed, and in June 2025, the Supreme Administrative Court overturned the first instance judgment and remanded the case.
What happened? Why file an administrative lawsuit against the New Taipei City Government?
Magang Fishing Village, located in Gongliao District, New Taipei City, is a fishing village settlement at the easternmost point of Taiwan Island. It is rich in seafood such as abalone, lobster, agar, and laver. The women of the village support their families by working as female divers (haenyeo) in the intertidal zone, forming a unique haenyeo culture.
The early settlers built stone houses near Magang Fishing Port, using locally sourced materials. These houses, designed for wind and erosion resistance, have walls up to one meter thick and are equipped with wave-breaking walls. The houses are stacked and interconnected, showcasing the ingenuity of the early settlers in adapting to the coastal environment. It is a rare example in the Northeast Coast of Taiwan of a still well-preserved stone house settlement.
However, since March and April 2018, several Magang residents have been sued by a foundation demanding the demolition of their stone houses and the return of their land. This stems from a long-standing discrepancy between landowners and homeowners in the area: residents have lived there for over a century, but after the Nationalist government came to Taiwan and the regime changed hands, the land was registered under only a few names. Homeowners had verbal agreements with the landowners, paying them land use fees. Starting in 2012, conglomerates began acquiring land from the landowners without the residents’ knowledge, only revealing the change of ownership after being sued.
To protect their homes and preserve the entire stone house cluster, the residents of Magang Fishing Village applied to the New Taipei City Government for registration as a cluster of buildings in November 2018 under the Cultural Heritage Preservation Act. They subsequently filed an administrative lawsuit against the New Taipei City Government’s August 2019 announcement that it would not register the cluster.
What demands do we have for the court?
The decision to refrain from registration has been revoked; a request has been made for the New Taipei City Government to register the Magang Fishing Village Settlement as a settlement complex.
What are the main legal issues in this case?
1. The New Taipei City Government commissioned Chang Chen-chung, a member of the Cultural Heritage Review Committee, to conduct a cultural heritage valuation. Subsequently, citing that Chang's valuation report indicated his stance on whether or not to register the cultural heritage, the City Government ordered him to recuse himself from the vote. Was this legal?
This is the point of contention in the first instance and appeal judgments of this case, involving the interpretation of the recusal system stipulated in Articles 32 and 33 of the Administrative Procedure Act.
The first instance court held that: Chang Chen-chung should not have recused himself, yet the New Taipei City Government ordered him to recuse himself; the original decision was not made in accordance with legal procedures and was organized illegally, therefore it was illegal. The appeal judgment held that: In cases where recusal is not warranted, unless the recusal affects the conclusion of the administrative decision or is otherwise stipulated by law, it does not automatically make the administrative decision illegal and subject to revocation.
2. Do the residents of Magang Fishing Village, who applied to register the settlement complex, possess the public law right to file a lawsuit to impose obligations in this case?
This is the point of contention in the retrial and appeal judgments of this case. This involves Article 19, Paragraph 2 of the Cultural Heritage Preservation Act, which stipulates that “local residents or groups may apply to the competent authorities of municipalities or counties (cities) for registration of settlement building complexes. The competent authorities shall review such applications in accordance with legal procedures.” Does this only allow local individuals or groups to “urge” the competent authorities to exercise their powers? Or has it already granted local residents a public law right to request the registration of settlement building complexes? The retrial court adopted the former, while the appellate court adopted the latter, pointing out that the provision has granted rights to a specific group.
What effect/goal does this lawsuit hope to achieve?
The entire Magang fishing village settlement complex has been preserved.
You can search for the judgment document if you wish to read it.
Taipei High Administrative Court Judgment No. 306 of 2020
Supreme Administrative Court Judgment No. 871 of 2020
Taipei High Administrative Court Judgment No. 53 of 2022
Supreme Administrative Court Judgment No. 816 of 2023