China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

China to Centralize Jurisdiction over International Cases, Starting from Hainan's Two Foreign-related Tribunals

Sat, 07 Mar 2020
Categories: China Legal Trends
Contributors: Meng Yu 余萌

 

Hainan’s newly-established First and Second Foreign-related Civil and Commercial Tribunals marks China’s first step towards a more centralized administration system on international cases.

Two tribunals were set up in Hainan, China’s southernmost province, to centrally hear foreign-related civil and commercial cases in the whole province. It marks China’s first step towards a more centralized administration system on international cases.

The two tribunals set up in Hainan Province were respectively named the First Foreign-related Civil and Commercial Tribunal (located at Haikou, the capital city of Hainan), and the Second Foreign-related Civil and Commercial Tribunal (located at Sanya, the most well-known seaside resort city in China).

It was the first time for China to try to centralize the foreign-related civil and commercial cases in the whole province to certain tribunals. Previously, these cases were usually handled by competent courts at primary and intermediate levels.

Hainan took this approach in order to better hear foreign-related civil and commercial cases.

Generally, Chinese judges in most local courts have very rare chances to deal with foreign-related civil and commercial cases, and therefore lack the related professional capability. Concentrated in certain tribunals, the foreign-related civil and commercial cases in the whole province will be heard by more experienced judges. The Supreme People’s Court (SPC) believes that this practice will provide investors with more stable expectations. [1]

China has established the pilot free trade zone (port) in Hainan, and has made efforts to set up a better cross-border commercial dispute settlement mechanism there. The SPC has also drawn up a corresponding plan for this purpose. [2]The establishment of foreign-related civil and commercial tribunals is part of the plan.


[1] 《海南第一、第二涉外民商事法庭海口知识产权法庭揭牌成立》, http://www.court.gov.cn/zixun-xiangqing-187641.html,

[2] 《最高人民法院关于为海南全面深化改革开放提供司法服务和保障的意见》, http://www.court.gov.cn/fabu-xiangqing-111631.html.

 

Photo by Agathè Yosefina(https://unsplash.com/@agathayosefina) on Unsplash

Contributors: Meng Yu 余萌

Save as PDF

You might also like

PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal, Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments

Recent Australian case law clarifies that the “double interest” mechanism in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) monetary judgments functions as a compensatory post-judgment interest framework rather than an unenforceable penalty. This consolidates Australia’s position as a highly attractive and creditor-friendly forum for enforcing Chinese judgments. See Zhengzhou Lvdu Real Estate Group Co v Shu [2024] NSWSC 58 (6 February 2024), Fu v Pang [2025] VSC 597 (16 September 2025)

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.