This Provisions embodied the basic concept of friendly, convenient and international arbitration-related judicial review, and establishing China’s international image as a “friendly jurisdiction in international arbitration”.

This Provisions is the “restatement of laws” of arbitration-related judicial interpretations and other normative documents as well as practical experience under the guidance of the documents issued by the central government.

First, specifying a more amicable attitude to support arbitration in a convenient way and standardizing judicial review proceedings. More connecting points are specified for those courts assuming judicial review of arbitration for the purpose of facilitating the parties. In order to better recognize and enforce foreign awards, it is stipulated that, where a foreign arbitral award relates to a case pending before a people’s court, neither the place of the domicile of the respondent nor the place of the property of the respondent is located in Mainland China, and the applicant applies for recognition of the foreign arbitral award, the people’s court before which the related lawsuit is pending shall be competent to hear the application, and where a foreign arbitral award relates to a case administered by an arbitral institution in Mainland China, neither the place of the domicile of the respondent nor the place of the property of the respondent is located in Mainland China, and the applicant applies for recognition of the foreign arbitral award, the intermediate people’s court where the arbitration institution locates shall be competent to hear the application. The procedures for application, acceptance and review of cases are specified to protect the parties’ right of action (Article 2-11).

Second, strengthening the finality of rulings on judicial review of arbitration. In order to maintain the efficiency of arbitration, it is provided that a ruling made by a people’s court in an arbitration-related judicial review case shall become legally effective once served. A party’s application for reconsideration, appeal and retrial shall not be entertained by the people’s court, unless otherwise provided by the law (Articles 7-10, Article 20).

Third, specifying the grounds for review of the validity of agreements on arbitration involving foreign elements and that of recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Firstly, where the parties intend to choose by agreement the law governing the validity of their arbitration agreement with foreign elements, they shall make an explicit expression to that effect. The fact that the applicable law of the contract has been agreed upon cannot determine that the same law governs the validity of the arbitration clause of the contract. Secondly, where, absent the parties’ choice of the governing law, application of the law of the place of the arbitral institution and that of the law of the seat of arbitration will bring about different results in respect of the validity of the arbitration agreement, the people’s court shall apply whichever law that renders the arbitration agreement valid. Furthermore, when a people’s court relies on the New York Convention to review a case in which a party applies for the recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award, if the respondent raises a defense that the arbitration agreement is null and void, the people’s court shall determine the law governing the validity of the arbitration agreement in accordance with the New York Convention (Article 12-16).

Fourth, standardizing interpretation and application of judicial review rules for arbitration. For example, the act of ‘soliciting or accepting bribes, engaging in illicit practices for personal gains, or intentionally misapplying the law when rending the award’ refers to an act determined in a legally effective criminal judgment or a disciplinary punishment decision, which is a restricted interpretation of the aforementioned act (Article 17-18).