China: International Dispute Resolution Newsletter – December 2015

Last Updated: 20 January 2016
Article by AnJie Law Firm


HKIAC Achieves Breakthrough by Launching Office in Mainland China

The Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) has reached an important milestone by being the first international arbitration institution to open a representative office in mainland China. This represents a major stride made by HKIAC to promote international arbitration services on the mainland.

The launch of HKIAC's Shanghai office marks the beginning of a new chapter of arbitration in mainland China, since it is the first time an offshore arbitration institution has set up a formal presence on the mainland. The Shanghai office is located within the China (Shanghai) Pilot Free Trade Zone, which has been designated by the State Council as an area to "support the introduction of internationally renowned commercial dispute resolution institutions". The office is headed by HKIAC's Deputy Secretary-General, Liu Jing, who has been facilitating HKIAC's on-the-ground support for its Chinese users for many years. The Shanghai office is HKIAC's second overseas presence.

CIETAC Opened Sub-Branch in Zhejiang

Recently, CIETAC opened its new sub-branch in Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province. An opening ceremony was held. CIETAC Zhejiang Branch is the sixth sub-branch of CIETAC after Huanan Shanghai, Tianjin, Xinan and Hong Kong sub-branchs were established.

"Zhejiang is an important economic zone in China. It has top-tier import and export amounts and the most prosperous private business in mainland China. Therefore, developing professional, convenient, and international commercial arbitration service in Zhejiang is a necessity", according to Mr. Yu, vice president as well as chief secretariat of CIETAC at the opening ceremony.

SIAC Beijing Conference Turns out to be a Huge Success

The 2015 SIAC Beijing Conference was successfully held on 3 November 2015. The topics discussed at the conference include: how to handle international disputes from a corporate perspective; how to advise a Chinese multinational company with cross-border disputes, and the relevance of dispute resolution mechanisms when trading with foreign companies, etc.

ICC Report Looks at Costs Allocation

The ICC Commission on Arbitration and ADR's latest report looks at how costs can be allocated between parties and at the specific role of arbitrators and counsel in costs management, in light of the fact that, on average, 83 per cent of costs are party costs.

India Revised Arbitration and Mediation Law

India recently had its Arbitration and Mediation Law revised. The Arbitration and Mediation Law was promulgated in 1996 and aimed at promoting ADR in commercial dispute resolution in India.


Hong Kong Court's Decision on Hybrid Arbitration Clause

On 18November2015, Hong Kong's Judge Chan issued a detailed decision refusing a defendant's serious set of challenges to an interim injunction ordered in Hong Kong in assistance to an imminent international arbitration. The July injunction had frozen approximately $2.5million in Hong Kong based assets in relation to defendant's alleged breach of an iron ore shipping and sales agreement. Plaintiff accomplished the injunction pursuant to 21M of the High Court Ordinance, which acts in support of "substantive proceedings" outside of Hong Kong and which either are imminent or have already begun. 21M of the High Court Ordinance also requires an applicant to demonstrate a good arguable case that the foreign proceedings may lead to a judgment enforceable in Hong Kong.

Defendant averred that Hong Kong's Section 45 of its Arbitration Ordinance was the only proper source of power for an injunction, but Plaintiff not only made its application for injunction under 21M, but failed to disclose to the Hong Kong court the full criteria to prevail under Section 45. Additionally, Defendant challenged whether Hong Kong was an appropriate forum for interim relief over Singapore.

Plaintiff was able to attain its injunction in Hong Kong but not Singapore because Hong Kong applied its own standard, which evaluated whether Defendant's conduct was of such unacceptably low commercial morality that there might be a real risk of dissipation of assets. Judge Chan stated that jurisdiction was a matter for the Tribunal itself, but circumstances might develop such that Hong Kong Court might even enforce the award of an ICC Singapore panel. Nonetheless, Judge Chan upheld the injunction according to a critical distinction; primary jurisdiction would go to the soon-to-be empaneled Singapore Tribunal, and not Singapore's courts. Besides, in Judge Chan's view, applicants for interim relief in support of arbitration proceedings simply have their choice between Section 45 of the Arbitration Ordinance or 21M of the High Court Ordinance.

Judge Chan's decision to uphold the injunction displays both openness and understanding towards the legal system of arbitration. Under the facts, Judge Chan may have very easily found an excuse to unravel the injunction; the Plaintiff failed its request for interim relief in the supervisory courts of Singapore, it delayed releasing $500,000 of funds to Defendant pursuant to the interim order, and it even referred the arbitration to the ICC instead of SIAC in apparent contravention of the arbitration clause. Nevertheless, the Judge focused primarily on whether the asset freeze was merited under the available facts, and whether it, or further intervention, would assist the Tribunal. Judge Chan thereby clarified that 21M of the High Court Ordinance is applicable to applicants in situations when an arbitration clause governs but the arbitration has not yet commenced.


Shanghai Intermediate People's Court's Creative Reasoning in Golden Landmark v. SITL Case

In a contract dispute between Shanghai Golden Landmark Co. Ltd (hereinafter as "Golden Landmark") and SIEMENS International Trade Co. Ltd (hereinafter as "SITL"), Golden Landmark filed an arbitration application to SIAC, and SIEMENS soon filed a counterclaim against Golden Landmark. SIAC made an award which was in favor of SITL and dismissed all the claims of Golden Landmark. SITL later applied to Shanghai First Intermediate People's Court (hereinafter as "the Court") for recognize and enforce the award, Golden Landmark challenged the application by stating that the arbitration agreement between the parties was invalid, so the award should not be recognized and enforced according to Article V (1) (a) of the New York Convention. The Court dismissed Golden landmark's challenge and made a final decision to recognize and enforce the award in China.

The major arguments of Golden Landmark were:

  1. The arbitration agreement between the parties was invalid because in a contract dispute which did not contain any foreign elements. Therefore the parties were not entitled to commence arbitration in front of a foreign arbitration institution according to current Chinese law. Hence, an award rendered based on an invalid arbitration agreement shall not be recognized and enforced under the New York Convention;
  2. Recognizing and enforcing the award would be contrary to the public policy of China;
  3. There were errors insubstantive issues in the award.

The Court, having verified the facts of this case and considered allegations and reasoning from both parties, rendered its decisions as follows:

  1. With regard to the first issue, the Court decided that the arbitration agreement was valid. The reason was that the arbitration agreement was drafted out of real intent of both parties. It clearly specified SIAC as the arbitration institution to settle any dispute arising from the contract. The only issue was whether the contract dispute was foreign-related. The Court further reasoned that the contract dispute did not contain any foreign elements prima facie, however, considering the nature of the contract, the parties and the process of contractual performance as a whole, this contract was obviously different from any pure domestic contracts, it was more of a foreign-related contract, since (1)the parties to the contract were WOFEs. Although they were Chinese legal entities according to Chinese law, their registration place were in Shanghai Free Trade Zone, the sources of the capital, allocation of income, governance of the companies were closely related to their foreign investors. Compared with normal domestic enterprises, these two companies had foreign-related characteristics; (2) the performance of the contract had foreign-related characteristic. The goods under this contract had to be imported from abroad to Shanghai Free Trade Zone and went through a whole set of Chinese custom procedures, which was more similar to international sale of goods. The Court thus concluded that the contract dispute fell within the scope of "Other situations that may be recognized as foreign-related civil relations" set forth in the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Certain Issues Concerning the Application of the "Law of the People's Republic of China on the Application of Laws to Foreign-Related Civil Relations" (I).
  2. As to the second issue, the Court decided that there was no ground or evidence to support that recognizing and enforcing this SIAC award would be contrary to Chinese public policy.
  3. In light of Golden Landmark's allegation that there were errors in substantive issues in SIAC's award, the Court decided that it was beyond the situation listed in New York Convention and refused to answer to Golden Landmark's request for alteration of payment of interests in the award. The Court additionally decided that "the fact that Golden Landmark had performed part of its obligations under SIAC's award was sufficient to prove that it recognized the legal binding force of the arbitration agreement and accepted jurisdiction of the tribunal. Therefore, based on the principles of good faith and promissory estoppel, the Court shall refuse Golden Landmark's challenge."

The decision of Shanghai First Intermediate People's Court was highly apprised by arbitration practitioners in China. It reminds people of a similar case a few years ago----Beijing Chaolaixinsheng Case. The decision in the latter case was, however, adversely different than the present one. However, the Shanghai Court's ruling did not substantively altered what had been decided in SPC's Rely over Chaolaixinsheng Case, because it did not directly give a positive answer to "whether Chinese parties are entitled to submit contract dispute which has no foreign element to a foreign arbitration institution".

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Practice Guides
by Mondaq Advice Centres
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions