China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

SPC Launches Diversified Dispute Resolution Case Database

Tue, 01 Apr 2025
Categories: China Legal Trends

In early February 2025, China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) launched a “Diversified Dispute Resolution Case Database”, which is open to the public.

The Database can be accessed at http://dyjfalk.court.gov.cn. As of mid-February, the Database has collected more than 200 typical cases where disputes are settled through non-judicial forms of dispute resolution such as mediation and arbitration.

The Database is intended to provide guidance to the public in choosing mediation and other dispute resolution methods. The cases span a variety of areas, including marriage and family disputes, traffic, property management, labor disputes, medical disputes, housing sales, land operations, financial consumption, and intellectual property.

 

 

Photo by Road Trip with Raj on Unsplash

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

Save as PDF

You might also like

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.

Chinese Judgments Go Global: Emerging Systemic Challenges and Confidence Deficit

This post analyzes the historic rise in cross-border judgment enforcement involving China, specifically focusing on the persistent challenges hindering the recognition of Chinese judgments abroad. It identifies two primary obstacles—emerging legal hurdles regarding systemic due process and a "confidence deficit" among Chinese creditors—and argues that addressing these is essential to sustaining the framework of mutual recognition.