By Meng Yu & Guodong Du
Last updated: March 14, 2019
We are endeavoring to collect all Chinese court decisions involving the recognition and enforcement of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC) arbitral awards. The Case List is made available for our readers to get a glimpse of the role of Chinese courts in international arbitration.
The Case List is continually updated with new reports. To date, we have collected 2 cases.
Result:
“Yes” – a Chinese court ruling is rendered on the recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award.
“No” – a Chinese court ruling is rendered against the recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award.
“Partial enforcement” – a Chinese court ruling is rendered on partial enforcement of the arbitral award.
“Withdrawal” – a Chinese court ruling is rendered to grant the motion to withdraw.
“Dismissal” – a Chinese court ruling is rendered to dismiss the application.
“Non-acceptance” – a Chinese court ruling is rendered to refuse to accept the case.
Arbitral Award:
The case number (and the date) of the arbitral award
Date:
The date of the Chinese court ruling
Bases:
“New York Convention” – The Chinese court ruling was rendered based on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the “New York Convention”)
“Arrangement” – The Chinese court ruling was rendered based on the Arrangement of the Supreme People’s Court on the Mutual Execution of Arbitral Awards between the Mainland and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (the “Arrangement”)
“CPL” – The Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China
Petitioner:
The party filing a petition to recognize and enforce the arbitral award
Respondent:
The party against whom the arbitral award is invoked
Chinese court:
The Chinese court that rendered the ruling
Court decision:
The docket number of the Chinese court ruling
Grounds:
The specific ground for refusal under the New York Convention or under the Arrangement, if the recognition and enforcement of an SCC arbitral award is refused
| Result | Arbitral Award | Date | Bases | Petitioner | Respondent | Chinese Court | Court Decision | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-acceptance | (January 30, 2014) | September 22, 2016 | CPL | Changsheng Trading Co.Inc | Henan Jianghe Industry Co., Ltd. (河南江河工业有限责任公司) | Jiangsu Higher People’s Court (江苏省高级人民法院) | [2016]苏民终783号 | Lack of jurisdiction |
| Yes | V(2014/143)(October 9, 2015) | August 14, 2017 | New York Convention | on Society Ltd. (SPS欧化公司) | Panjin Heyun Industrial Group Co., Ltd. (盘锦和运实业集团有限公司) | Dalian Intermediate People’s Court (大连市中级人民法院) | [2016]辽02协外认12号 |
If you would like to discuss with us about the post, or share your views and suggestions, please contact Ms. Meng Yu (meng.yu@chinajusticeobserver.com). If you would like to acquire the full text of these decisions, please also contact Ms. Meng Yu.
If you need legal services for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards in China, please contact Mr. Guodong Du (guodong.du@chinajusticeobserver.com ). Du and his team of experienced attorneys will be able to assist you.
If you wish to receive news and gain deep insights into the Chinese judicial system, please feel free to subscribe to our newsletters (subscribe.chinajusticeobserver.com ).