China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

China Annual Report 2019 on Judicial Review of Commercial Arbitration Highlights (4): Judicial Review of Foreign-Related Arbitration Agreements

Fri, 19 Nov 2021
Categories: Insights
Contributors: Meng Yu 余萌

avatar

On 23 Dec. 2020, China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) published the  Annual Report on Judicial Review of Commercial Arbitration (2019) (the Report). Case heard by Chinese courts for judicial review of foreign-related arbitration agreements in 2019 are introduced in Items 1-4 of Section VI, Part Three thereof.

China Annual Report 2019 on Judicial Review of Commercial Arbitration Highlights:

    1. Background;
    2. Laws, Rules, and Policies;
    3. Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards;
    4. Judicial Review of Foreign-Related Arbitration Agreements.

These cases provide insight into how Chinese courts review foreign-related arbitration agreements in practice.

Pursuant to the structure of the Report, the cases mentioned in the Report, together with links to their full texts are provided below.

1. Application for Determining the Validity of Arbitration Agreement between Claimant Luck Treat Co., Ltd. and Respondent Shenzhen Zhongyuancheng Commercial Investment Holdings Co., Ltd. (申请人运裕有限公司与被申请人深圳市中苑城商业投资控股有限公司申请确认仲裁协议效力案), Supreme People’s Court (2019) Zui Gao Fa Min Te No.1 Civil Ruling (September 18, 2019).

2. Application for Determining the Validity of Arbitration Agreement between Claimant Newpower Enterprises Inc. Co., Ltd. and Respondent Shenzhen Zhongyuancheng Commercial Investment Holdings Co., Ltd. (申请人新劲企业公司与被申请人深圳市中苑城商业投资控股有限公司申请确认仲裁协议效力案), Supreme People’s Court (2019) Zui Gao Fa Min Te No.2 Civil Ruling (September 18, 2019).

3. Application for Determining the Validity of Arbitration Agreement between Claimants Beijing CTS H.K. Metropark Hotels Management Co., Ltd. and Shenzhen Metropark Jinghua Hotel Co., Ltd. and Respondent Shenzhen Zhongyuancheng Commercial Investment Holdings Co., Ltd. (申请人北京港中旅维景国际酒店管理有限公司、深圳维景京华酒店有限公司与被申请人深圳市中苑城商业投资控股有限公司申请确认仲裁协议效力案) Supreme People’s Court (2019) Zui Gao Fa Min Te No.3 Civil Ruling (September 18, 2019).

4. Application for Determining the Validity of an Arbitration Agreement between Claimant Henan Kanghui Aviation Technology Co., Ltd. and Respondent Jetstar Pacific Airlines, Inc. (申请人河南康辉航空科技有限公司与被申请人捷星太平洋航空股份有限公司申请确认仲裁协议效力案) Zhengzhou Intermediate People’s Court of Henan Province (2019) Yu 01 Min Te No. 18 Civil Ruling (August 26, 2019) 

 

Photo by zhang kaiyv on Unsplash

Contributors: Meng Yu 余萌

Save as PDF

You might also like

SPC's Revised Rules Extend Reach of International Commercial Courts

In December 2023, China's Supreme People’s Court's newly amended provisions extended the reach of its International Commercial Courts (CICC). To establish a valid choice of court agreement, three requirements must be met - the international nature, the agreement in writing, and the amount in controversy - while the 'actual connection' is no longer required.

China’s Wenzhou Court Recognizes a Singapore Monetary Judgment

In 2022, a local Chinese court in Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province, ruled to recognize and enforce a monetary judgment made by the Singapore State Courts, as highlighted in one of the typical cases related to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) recently released by China’s Supreme People’s Court (Shuang Lin Construction Pte. Ltd. v. Pan (2022) Zhe 03 Xie Wai Ren No.4).

2023 Asia-Pacific Regional Arbitration Group Conference Opens in Beijing

In November 2023, the 2023 Asia-Pacific Regional Arbitration Group Conference (APRAG) kicked off in Beijing, focusing on international arbitration amid changing times, with China's Ministry of Justice announcing plans for an International Commercial Arbitration Center pilot project and Beijing's commitment to providing comprehensive legal services.

Legal Crossroads: Canadian Court Denies Summary Judgment for Chinese Judgment Recognition When Faced with Parallel Proceedings

In 2022, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice of Canada refused to grant summary judgment to enforce a Chinese monetary judgment in the context of two parallel proceedings in Canada, indicating that the two proceedings should proceed together as there was factual and legal overlap, and triable issues involved defenses of natural justice and public policy (Qingdao Top Steel Industrial Co. Ltd. v. Fasteners & Fittings Inc. 2022 ONSC 279).