China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

China to Strengthen Governance of Sham Litigation

Mon, 13 Dec 2021
Categories: China Legal Trends

On 9 Nov. 2021, the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) issued the “Opinions on the Further Governance of Sham Litigation” (hereinafter “the Opinions”, 关于深入开展虚假诉讼整治工作的意见) and typical cases on the governance of sham litigation.

In recent years, some people in China filed lawsuits with courts based on fictitious legal relationships, fabricated facts, forged evidence and false certificates. They hoped to use the courts’ judgments to misappropriate property, transfer assets, and make fraudulent insurance claims.

Chinese courts have been plagued by this and have been trying to identify sham litigation. The Opinions reflects the SPC’s attempts to do so.

The Opinions identifies ten types of common sham litigation, including private lending disputes, lawsuits on objection to enforcement, enterprise bankruptcy disputes, corporate separation or merger disputes, trademark disputes involving well-known trademarks as well as disputes which arise from divorce, division of family property, inheritance and real estate sales contracts, and are related to housing demolition and resettlement.

The Opinions pays particular attention to sham litigation of real estate sales. Due to China’s strict controls on real estate transactions to control the bubble, many traders try to transfer the ownership of the immovables through litigation.

 

 

Cover Photo by Felix Zhao on Unsplash

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

Save as PDF

Related laws on China Laws Portal

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.