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
Editor: Lin Haibin 林海斌
Save as PDF

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

China’s Supreme People’s Court
Arbitration in China
Judicial Review of Arbitration in China
Insight: China Justice

You might also like

SPC Issues Guiding Cases on Gig Worker Protection

In December 2024, China’s Supreme People’s Court issued its first guiding cases on gig worker labor disputes, clarifying criteria for determining employment relationships with platform companies.

China's First Third-Party Funding Arbitration Case Named Top Ten by Beijing Court

In November 2024, the Beijing Fourth Intermediate People's Court selected China's first third-party funding-related arbitration case (Ruili Airlines Co., Ltd. et al. v. CLC Aircraft Leasing (Tianjin) Co., Ltd.(2022) Jing 04 Min Te No. 368-369 ), as one of its top ten typical cases, setting a precedent for judicial review of arbitration involving third-party funding.

Chinese Supreme Court Judgment Enforced by Court of NSW Australia

In October 2024, the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Australia ruled to enforce a Chinese monetary judgment (Fujian Rongtaiyuan Industrial Co Ltd v Zhan [2024] NSWSC 1318). The Chinese judgment was made by the Fujian High People’s Court, which was affirmed by a judgment of China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) in 2021.

China’s First Tribunal-Ordered Interim Measure Issued in Beijing

In October 2024, an arbitral tribunal at the Beijing Arbitration Commission (BAC/BIAC) issued an interim measure based on the applicant’s request, which was later confirmed and enforced by the court through a preservation order. This is the first of its kind in China, confirming the validity of tribunal-issued interim measures and highlighting the pro-arbitration stance of Chinese courts.