In 2022, the New South Wales Supreme Court of Australia ruled to enforce a judgment of a Shanghai local court, just before the 12-year limitation period expires. It marks the fifth time that an Australian court has recognized and enforced Chinese monetary judgments (Tianjin Yingtong Materials Co. Ltd. v Young  NSWSC 943).
Very unlikely. This is because the new policy on recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments issued by China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC), which has been implemented since 2022, will discourage local courts from doing so.
Seizure of electronic storage devices and electronic data extraction are the two statutory methods. It is also noteworthy that different approaches would apply when it comes to collection of the electronic data located in China and of that located outside of China.
In 2020, Ningbo Intermediate People’s Court of China ruled in Wen v. Huang et al. (2018) to recognize and enforce a US judgment, marking the third time that American monetary judgments have been enforced in China.
In 2021, Xiamen Maritime Court of China ruled to recognize a Singaporean insolvency order in In re Xihe Holdings Pte. Ltd. et al. (2020), providing an example of how Chinese courts recognize foreign bankruptcy judgments based on the principle of reciprocity.
In March 2022, Shanghai Maritime Court ruled to recognize and enforce an English judgment in Spar Shipping v Grand China Logistics (2018), marking the first time that an English monetary judgment has been enforced in China based on reciprocity.