China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

SPC Releases Typical Cases to Support Hong Kong Arbitration

Thu, 31 Oct 2024
Categories: China Legal Trends

On 5 Sept. 2024, China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) released six typical cases related to Hong Kong arbitration, highlighting the judicial stance of the Chinese courts in supporting Hong Kong arbitration and promoting the high-quality development of international arbitration.

These cases include applications for confirming the validity of Hong Kong-related arbitration agreements, assisting Hong Kong arbitration through preservation measures, as well as applications for the recognition and enforcement of Hong Kong arbitral awards.

Take Case No. Six, “SE Company (Germany) Case” (2021) Jing 04 Ren Gang No. 3 ((2021) 京04认港3号), as an example. This case involved the recognition and enforcement of an award rendered by a foreign arbitration institution in Hong Kong. Beijing Fourth Intermediate People’s Court held that the arbitration award issued by the ICC International Court of Arbitration in Hong Kong should be recognized as a Hong Kong arbitral award. The Court then ruled to recognize and enforce the award in accordance with the Mainland-Hong Kong Arrangement.

Related Post:

Since 2019, Chinese courts have handled over 1,000 judicial review cases related to Hong Kong arbitration. As of April 2024, the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre alone has submitted 119 applications to mainland courts for assistance with preservation measures, involving amounts exceeding CNY 30 billion (or USD 4.2 billion). The average time from the mainland courts’ acceptance of preservation applications to the completion of preservation measures is 28.3 days.

 

 

Photo by Chi Hung Wong on Unsplash

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

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)