For a long time, Chinese courts have assigned cases to judges by their own dedicated personnel. Now, Chinese courts are trying to replace the traditional practice with a random case assignment mechanism.
We believe that China’s Supreme People's Court (SPC) has a strong desire to break the deadlock between China and Japan arising out of the mutual refusal to recognize and enforce each other’s court judgments.
A court in Qingdao, China, ruled in March 2019 to recognize and enforce a South Korean judgment, which is the first time that a Chinese court has recognized and enforced a South Korean monetary judgment.
If I purchase goods from China through a cross-border e-commerce platform, and I have a dispute with a Chinese in this process, I can kick start the lawsuit with a computer at home with the Chinese Internet Court by myself. Can this scenario be a reality now?
The Supreme People's Court (SPC) of China makes a number of responses to guide local courts in making decisions for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in specific cases. Are these responses binding on for a court when deciding subsequent cases?
In the hierarchical structure of Chinese courts, the courts manage cases and supervise judges by making and transferring case files. Therefore, case files show the most real aspect of Chinese litigation.