In a long-awaited procedural update, China has designated the Beijing No. 4 Intermediate People's Court as the competent domestic court for the recognition and enforcement of awards issued by the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). The designation, officially confirmed in an ICSID List of Contracting States and Measures Taken by Them for the Purpose of the Convention updated in July 2026, addresses a long-standing institutional gap. Although the ICSID Convention entered into force for China on February 6, 1993, Article 54(2) requires each Contracting State to formally designate a specific court or authority for enforcement purposes.
For decades, China’s strict adherence to absolute state immunity prevented domestic courts from entertaining applications for the recognition and enforcement of international investment arbitration awards. Furthermore, the previous domestic statutory framework lacked explicit mechanisms for courts to handle such investment disputes. The legal landscape shifted significantly on January 1, 2024, when China’s Foreign State Immunity Law took effect, transitioning the country to a regime of restrictive state immunity. While China’s treaty obligations under the ICSID Convention long predate this legislation, the shift to restrictive immunity substantially impacts the judicial review of state-investor arbitral matters. This framework is further reinforced by the newly revised Arbitration Law—in effect since March 1, 2026—which added explicit statutory provisions governing international investment arbitration.
Legal experts note that obtaining judicial recognition of an ICSID award remains distinct from actual asset recovery. Even after an award is recognized, enforcing it against foreign state property in China requires overcoming the threshold of immunity from execution—a legal standard significantly higher and more restrictive than immunity from jurisdiction. Looking ahead, international legal practitioners are closely observing whether the Supreme People's Court will issue operational guidelines or judicial interpretations to clarify procedural rules, required documentation, and evidentiary standards for applicants.
Related Posts:
- China’s SPC Issues Foreign State Immunity Case Guidelines
- Official English Version of China’s Law on Foreign State Immunity Published
- China Overhauls Arbitration Law for Global Alignment
Photo by Jéan Béller on Unsplash
Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team
