China Justice Observer

中国司法观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)Chinese (Traditional)DutchFrenchGermanItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkish

June 2021 Update: List of China's Cases on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Thu, 10 Jun 2021
Categories: Insights
Editor: C. J. Observer

List of China’s Cases on Recognition of Foreign Judgments in 2021

 

On 8 June 2021, China Justice Observer released the 2021 version of List of China’s Cases on Recognition of Foreign Judgments. To date, we have collected 72 cases involving China and 24 foreign States and regions. (Note: Foreign divorce judgments are excluded in the Case List.)

The key features of the updated list are:

  • The List comprises 24 concise reports for each jurisdiction, together with a chart for bilateral judicial assistance treaties that China and 39 States have concluded, among which 35 bilateral treaties include the judgment enforcement clauses.
  • First time the cases involving 4 jurisdictions (i.e. New Zealand, Belarus, Kenya, Myanmar) are included. Please note that there are two landmark cases where a Chinese judgment was recognized for the first time in New Zealand and a Belarusian judgment was recognized for the first time in China respectively. For a detailed discussion of these cases, see our earlier posts on the New Zealand case (Yang Chen v. Jinzhu Lin), the Belarus case (Duo Mou Ni Mou v. Duo Mou Mie Mou), the Kenya case (Liu Chongliang v. Webwave Electric Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (Kenya) et al.), and the Myanmar case (Tan Junping et al v. Liu Zuosheng et al.).
  • 10 cases involving the existing six jurisdictions, namely, South Korea (three cases), the U.S. (two cases), Japan (two cases), Singapore (one case), UAE (one case), and Poland (one case), are added. Please note that the case of Pektor Art Co., Ltd. in 2020, being the second South Korean judgment recognized in China, and the case of LEE WON JUNE in 2019, being the second Chinese judgment recognized in South Korea, send positive signals that after China took the first step in the Qingdao Case, a “follow-suit” circle is formed in practice between China and South Korea.
  • Each case has been reviewed, and more details, such as the case numbers, causes of action and case analysis, are added. Please note that we have updated the cause of action and posted an analysis for two cases involving Uzbekistan, where China refuses to enforce Uzbekistan judgments twice, due to improper service of process.

We would like to thank the following persons/institutions that shared thoughts and valuable information with us:

As always, we endeavor to collect all Chinese court decisions involving the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments (“REFJ”), and foreign counterparts concerning the recognition and enforcement of Chinese judgments. The Case List is made available for our readers to build reasonable expectations on REFJ in China.

The Case List is continually updated with new reports. Case information, comments, and suggestions are most welcome. Please feel free to contact Ms. Meng YU via e-mail at meng.yu@chinajusticeobserver.com .

For an overview of the disposition of cases on REFJ, please see the three tables below.

List of China's Cases on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

List of China's Cases on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

List of China's Cases on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

 

For information about bilateral judicial assistance treaties that China and 39 States have concluded, please see the table below.

(For the List of China's Bilateral Treaties on Judicial Assistance in Civil and Commercial Matters (Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Included), please click here. Authoritative texts in Chinese and other languages are now available.)

List of China's Bilateral Treaties on Judicial Assistance in Civil and Commercial Matters

For the detailed country(region) report about cases on REFJ, please see the following charts.

Cases between China and USA on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and USA on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Australia on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Belarus on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and British Virgin Islands (BVI) on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Canada on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Chad on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and France on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Germany on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Israel on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Italy on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Japan on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Kenya on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Malaysia on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Myanmar on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Netherlands on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and New Zealand on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Poland on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Russia on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Singapore on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Singapore on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and Turkey on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and UAE on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and UK on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Cases between China and the USA on Recognition of Foreign Judgments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contributors: Guodong Du 杜国栋 , Meng Yu 余萌

Save as PDF

You might also like

Degu Mediation of the Yi People in China

A closer look at Degu Mediation of the Yi Chinese people reveals how the traditional mediation mechanism evolves from functioning beyond the national framework to being incorporated into the judicial system.

Does Chinese Court approve Bitcoin Exchanges?

"No", answers a Shenzhen court in Gao v. Shenzhen Yunsilu Innovation Development Fund Enterprise (2018), ruling to set aside an arbitral award on the ground of public policy, given that cryptocurrency exchanges are banned in China.