我國法規定大陸人民經由收養來台依親必須得到我國法院的認可，因此法院在審理涉陸收養事件時，為避免有無效或有得撤銷之原因，必須審查涉陸收養之成立要件與方式，惟兩岸收養制度明顯不同，大陸更於一九九九年修改收養法，法院在處理涉陸收養案件時，依台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例規定若指示適用大陸法時，究竟是適用大陸之內國收養規定或外國收養規定，直接適用實體法規定或其國際私法之規定，大陸收養法如何正確解讀、法律漏洞如何補充等，進而在我內國法的適用上，台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例中反致規定如何適用、涉陸收養與涉外收養發生競合時如何處理，涉陸收養關係終止效力之準據法是否為立法上的疏漏，及實務對於上開疑義的處理是否妥當等，為本文所欲討論的重點。 In accordance with our law adoption of a child from the Mainland shall be applied to the courts for admission. During a trial case relating to adoption between the people of Taiwan and the Mainland, the courts should check the legal requirements and form of the adoption to prevent the adoption on the ground that it is null and void or it may be annulled. The rules of adoption between Taiwan and Mainland China are, however, apparently different. Moreover, Mainland China amended its Adoption Code in 1999. When the courts are dealing with those cases relating to people from Mainland China, if the Act Governing Relations between People of Taiwan and the Mainland stipulates application of the Mainland rules, shall the courts apply the domestic adoption rules or the inter-country adoption rules? Shall the courts apply the substantive laws or the international privacy laws? How is one to interpret Mainland China’s adoption rules? How does one address legal gaps? Furthermore, in terms of application of domestic rules, how does one apply the renvoi? How does one address the problem when Mainland adoption and foreign adoption happen concurrently? Is the absence of rules for the termination of adoption between the people of Taiwan and the people of Mainland China people a legislative gap? Have the courts made proper decisions in regard to the above questions above? These are the key points of this essay.