China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

China’s SPC Issues Foreign State Immunity Case Guidelines

Thu, 22 May 2025
Categories: China Legal Trends

On 26 Mar. 2025, China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) released the “Notice on Procedural Matters for Civil Cases Involving Foreign State Immunity” (hereinafter the “Notice”, 关于涉外国国家豁免民事案件相关程序事项的通知), which provides unified guidance for Chinese courts in applying the Foreign State Immunity Law and adjudicating cases involving foreign state immunity.

The Foreign State Immunity Law, which took effect on 1 Jan. 2024, is an important legislative step reflecting China’s adaptation to the evolving diplomatic landscape. The Law signifies China’s shift from absolute immunity to restrictive immunity with respect to foreign state immunity.

The Notice outlines eight procedural provisions addressing key aspects of foreign state immunity, such as case acceptance, centralized jurisdiction, service of process, review of jurisdictional immunity claims, and the acquisition of certification documents from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Chinese courts will adopt a centralized jurisdiction mechanism for these major and novel types of foreign-related civil cases involving foreign state immunity. Intermediate people’s courts with jurisdiction over foreign-related civil and commercial cases in the provincial capital cities will be designated to handle such cases.

At the acceptance stage, if the plaintiff names a foreign state as either a defendant or a third party, they must specify the legal basis and applicable exceptions in the complaint. Courts are obligated to provide clarifications, and if the plaintiff fails to provide the required basis, the case will not be accepted.

Regarding procedural reviews, courts are required to examine ex officio whether the immunity claim of the foreign state concerned is valid. A foreign state’s participation in jurisdictional challenge proceedings does not constitute consent to jurisdiction.

 

 

Photo by Dominic Kurniawan Suryaputra on Unsplash

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

Save as PDF

You might also like

IOMed Settles First Case, Resolving China-Singapore Maritime Dispute

The newly established International Organization for Mediation (IOMed) has successfully resolved its inaugural case—a maritime charter dispute between Chinese and Singaporean parties—marking a major milestone for the world’s first government-backed global mediation body.

China Overhauls Arbitration Law for Global Alignment

Having entered into force on March 1, 2026, China’s first comprehensive revision of its 1995 Arbitration Law has introduced ad hoc arbitration, strengthened interim relief, and aligned the legal framework more closely with international standards.

Chinese Judgments Go Global: Emerging Systemic Challenges and Confidence Deficit

This post analyzes the historic rise in cross-border judgment enforcement involving China, specifically focusing on the persistent challenges hindering the recognition of Chinese judgments abroad. It identifies two primary obstacles—emerging legal hurdles regarding systemic due process and a "confidence deficit" among Chinese creditors—and argues that addressing these is essential to sustaining the framework of mutual recognition.