本文之目標在於探索處理原住民家事糾紛之法院內的規範秩序互動情形，以瞭解原住民的法律地位與弱勢處境。本文自台灣本島各地方法院、高等法院與最高法院收集並分析原住民家事事件，發現法院於形成此類案件的裁判時，係在國家制定法、父權權力關係、漢民族父系社會家庭圖像，以及漢人對原住民的污名化刻板印象之規範架構下進行，導致在近親禁婚、姻親之定義、姓氏變更、夫妻財產分配、以及繼承方面的原住民族習慣法受到法院漠視。只有在訂婚和母系社會之子女姓氏傳承等方面的原住民習慣法受到法院承認並據以形成裁判。然而，國家司法系統所採認並執行的習慣法規範，與人類學者在原住民部落之社會脈絡下，所觀察而得的法規範內容有差異。本文建議，與國際人權標準相呼應的原住民習慣法應受到法院採認與執行。此外，法院在進行習慣法轉譯的過程中，應自原住民族的立場出發，採取由下而上的方式進行習慣法的解釋與適用，以避免對原住民習慣法產生錯誤認知。

The aim of this article is to explore the interaction of regulatory orders in the social field of the state courts dealing with indigenous family disputes so as to understand the legal position and the disadvantaged status of indigenous peoples. Indigenous family cases were collected and analysed from the District Courts, the High Court and the Supreme Court of Taiwan. It is found that the court cases are ruled under the matrix of the state law, the power of patriarchy, patrilineal family pattern developed from the Han society, and the stigmatized and stereotyped image of indigenous society expressed by Han people. As a result, indigenous customary laws with reference to the rule prohibiting the marriage of close relatives, the definition of ＂in-laws＂, the rule of changing surname, the partition of matrimonial property, and the rule of inheritance are overlooked by the courts. Only a few indigenous customary rules, including the rules of engagement or passing the surname to children in the matrilineal societies, were recognized by the courts as the ruling bases. However, the norms which are acknowledged and sought to be enforced by the state judicial system are different from the norms observed by the anthropologists in terms of the social context of indigenous tribes. It is suggested that the indigenous customary rules resonating with the international human rights standards should be recognized and enforced by the courts. Moreover, the courts should adopt the bottom-up approach to interpret and apply the indigenous customary rules in order to avoid judicial misperceptions in the process of legal transformation.