China: Post-Award Settlement for International Arbitration

Last Updated: 17 April 2012
Article by Zhang Shouzhi, Xu Beibei and Hu Ke

A final arbitral award is the final and binding conclusion of the substantial dispute submitted to arbitration by the parties. It defines the winner and the loser of the game. In few occasions would the parties be willing to settle their disputes after an award has been rendered. However, settlement is still a wise choice when the disputed amount is huge, and the parties still have the will.

In 2011, we assisted 2 separate clients in negotiating amicable settlements after the arbitral awards were rendered in offshore arbitrations. We provide below a brief description of the two cases:

Case One: Arbitration Arising under a Confidentiality Agreement

A dispute arose out of an agreement on the confidentiality of technical information between a foreign party and a Chinese party concerning several ongoing large-scale projects with a disputed amount of more than USD 200 million. The forum was a notable offshore arbitration institute.

The tribunal made a partial award 1 and it recommended the parties to resolve their remaining disputes amicably in light of the partial award.

The parties jointly entrusted an independent mediator to chair the mediation process and a settlement agreement was reached in several months.

Case Two: Application for Recognition and Enforcement of an Australian Arbitration Award

In this case, an Australian mining company and a Chinese steel company had a dispute over their iron ore sales agreements, and the case was submitted to arbitration in Australia. The tribunal awarded more than USD 100 million to the Australian exporter.

In the recognition proceedings, the parties reached an overall settlement agreement to resolve all the disputes by continuing the purchase and sale of iron ore, and to re-establish their business cooperation.

This article aims at sharing our experiences and thoughts regarding these 2 cases involving post-award settlement.

I. The incompleteness of a final award is an important motivation for post-award settlement

As mentioned at the beginning, an award defines the winner and the loser from a legal perspective. The former may prefer to consolidate the result in a hot pursuit, and the question arises as to what drives him to settle with the latter.

The reason is simple. In the area of international commercial arbitration, a final award does not guarantee a final resolution of the disputes, and the winner is not guaranteed to carry his smile till the end.

  1. Risks in Setting-aside Proceedings in the Seat
  2. Parties to international commercial arbitrations will normally be able to, pursuant to the law of the seat of the arbitration, apply for setting aside the award or, in some forums lodge an appeal to local courts and thereby challenge the binding nature of the award.

    In China, parties may, on the grounds of procedural irregularities, apply for annulling a foreign-related arbitral award according to Article 70 of the Arbitration Law. In jurisdictions implementing the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration ("Model Law"), parties are able to apply to set aside an international arbitral award based on Article 34(2) of the Model Law; the 1996 Arbitration Act of England and Wales allows, in addition to applications for setting-aside, appeals on questions of law arising out of the award according to its Article 69.

    A disadvantaged party in an international commercial arbitration of significant importance is very likely to raise various material or non-material procedural dissents – not only to delay the proceeding at one side, but also to lay down grounds for future resistance to enforcement. Violation of procedural rules or due process, whether significant or not, would be excuses for the losing party to seek judicial intervention in the seat or resist the recognition and enforcement in other jurisdictions. The winning party has to take these risks into account.

    A recent notable case, Pacific China Holdings Ltd (In Liquidation) v Grand Pacific Holdings Ltd (HCCT 15/2010) before the High Court of Hong Kong, Court of First Instance, revealed such risks. The case involved an international arbitration conducted in Hong Kong under the ICC Rules of Arbitration. The court found that the tribunal denied a reasonable opportunity for the applicant to present its case and failed to comply with the agreement of the parties, and consequently set aside the award according to Article 34(2) of the Model Law. Remarkably, the court repeated the threshold for exercising discretion in favor of setting aside as under some previous authorities such as Paklito Investment Ltd v Klockner East Asia Ltd [1993] 2 HKLR 39 and Apex Tech Investment Ltd v Chuang's Development (China) Ltd [1996] 2 HKC 293, that so long as the result could have been different if the procedural irregularity had not occurred, the court should exercise its discretion to set aside the award.

  1. Risks in Recognition Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions
  2. If the losing party does not comply with the award and its assets were located outside of the forum's jurisdiction, normally the award had to be recognized by other jurisdictions before being put into enforcement by local enforcing authorities.

    The circumstances under which an application for recognition and enforcement can be refused under Article V of the New York Convention are exhaustive. That is to say, if no circumstance under Article V exists, the award should be recognized and enforced. 2 Though the New York Convention provides a pro-arbitration atmosphere for recognition of arbitral awards, the winning party is not guaranteed a favorable result.

    The risk for the winning party in the course of recognition also finds its origin in procedural issues. In a recent case for recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award rendered in London, we, as counsel for the respondent, found that the award did not contain "reasons for the award", where there was no agreement between the parties to dispense with reasons. This seriously violated Article 52(4) of the Arbitration Act 1996 of England. It is worth bearing in mind that some civil law jurisdictions would be more cautious applying "waiver" or "estoppel" in procedural issues, and unless otherwise agreed, failure to raise an objection to procedural irregularity before the tribunal or failure to seek remedies from the courts of the seat of arbitration does not prevent the party from arguing on these issues in the recognition and enforcement stage.

    Furthermore, the legal system and culture varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and there are significant differences between common law and civil law jurisdictions. Judges of the enforcing courts have developed their legal way of thinking under their own legal traditions, and thus their ability to understand an award which is a product of another legal tradition is inevitably constrained. This increases the risk for an award to be rejected in another jurisdiction. In a recent case, Gao Haiyan v Keeneye Holdings Ltd (HCCT 21/2010) before the High Court of Hong Kong, the Court of First Instance refused enforcement of the award as the Court found that the arbitration commission, in inviting a third party to participate the conciliation process and putting forward a settlement proposal to a party without prior consultation with the other, gave rise to an apprehension of apparent bias. However, as a matter of fact, in the arb-med practice in mainland China, inviting a third party to assist the conciliation and to propose a settlement by the tribunal has a long history and can be seen in many occasions. The tribunal in the case did fail to follow the arbitration rules, but taking consideration of the story, it is unfair to put a label of "apparent bias". Though the conclusion of the Court of First Instance has been overthrown by the Court of Appeal in late 2011, the lesson from this case should not be neglected; full consideration should be given to the differences in legal culture and practice between jurisdictions.

  1. Risks in Enforcement Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions
  2. Having overcome the obstacles in the arbitration, setting-aside and recognition proceedings, the winning party is close to the finish. However, difficulties in enforcement may still cause a great deal of trouble.

    Enforcement difficulties are normally caused by the losing party avoiding enforcement purposefully. Some may play a trick by designing a complicated corporate or transaction structure at the very beginning so as to escape quickly in case of severe liabilities. For example, a shell company in Hong Kong which is a party to a business contract may have nothing to be enforced against, while all of its business is conducted by another entity registered in another jurisdiction. Some may utilize the lack of supervision in some tax haven, or use deceptive means such as fake contracts, fake mortgages or fake litigation to transfer their assets quickly.

    Enforcement difficulties get worse if the condition of the rule of law is not that pleasant. As Bose, Yap and Jaliwala said, "the reality is that enforcement of arbitration awards remains problematic in many countries in the world including several Asian jurisdictions. Corruption, local protectionism, faulty regulation, ignorance and systemic inefficiency make enforcement proceedings difficult, time-consuming and, sometimes, impossible." 3 It seriously increases the risks that the local party would manipulate the enforcement procedure, causing additional enforcement costs to the winning party and eventually endangering the possibility of enforcing the award.

    In China, enforcement difficulties have been haunting the court system for a long time. Difficulties in finding the respondent, locating the assets, obtaining cooperation from relevant parties and enforcing the subject assets, as revealed in a Supreme Court notice in 1999, were still serious problems. Resistance to enforcement is very common, illegal intervention and local or sectoral protection can be perceived, and some courts fail to comply with the law in enforcement activities. These are risks for the winning party to take into account.

  1. Actual enforcement of the Award may not resolve the dispute fully and thoroughly
  2. Complex commercial disputes normally involve a series of legal relationships, which results in the dispute being divided into several legal proceedings. As the scope of arbitration is defined by the arbitration agreement, in the case where only disputes under one or several contracts go to arbitration, the tribunal would be incapable to give an overall resolution to the disputes between the parties. Also, in most cases the award is a zero-sum solution, with the root of the problem still being there and probably further developed.

    For example, a dispute under a Sino-foreign joint venture may be connected to a dispute between the investor and the JV company, but the JV company is not bound by the arbitration agreement in the JV contract. 4 Therefore arbitration under the JV contract may not provide a full and thorough solution for the parties.

    The series of disputes between Wahaha and Danone included 8 arbitration proceedings under the SCC Arbitration Rules, one arbitration proceeding in Hangzhou Arbitration Commission for a trademark transfer contract dispute, and about dozens of court proceedings in various jurisdictions including China, the United States, BVI, Samoa, France and Italy. Not a single award or court judgment would be able to solve their complex dispute and satisfy any party ultimately; on the contrary, settlement gave the parties a chance to fully consider an overall way out, and settle the dispute efficiently, fully and thoroughly.

    In summary, an arbitral award is not a guarantee for the winning party. There exist many risks and uncertainties on the road to a final resolution. Being voluntary and less contentious, the conciliation process and the settlement agreement provide a mutually acceptable result from a substantial perspective. Furthermore, they also promote mutual understanding and respect to each other's different opinions and needs through improved communications. It is a natural consequence that a settlement agreement is more likely to be respected and honored by the parties.

    The incompleteness of arbitral awards makes settlement not only a need but also a realistic option for parties to arbitration.

II. Post-Award Settlement Has Other Apparent Features and Advantages

In addition to the above, settlement has the following features and advantages compared to enforcing an arbitral award:

Firstly, settlement emphasizes peace-making through open discussion. It is a great asset for the parties to maintain and even develop their relationship.

The conciliation process is aimed at consensus between the parties. When leading the parties through the evaluation of their pros and cons, conciliation will focus on locating the balance point for the interests of the parties and trying to restore peace through enhanced mutual understanding. It will help the parties collaborate rather than confront each other. Also, for the losing party who disagrees with the final award, which is a form of judgment on the substantial issues of the parties, its reasoning still provides some guidance after all for the parties understand the merits of the case more objectively, and thus creates important opportunities for the parties to enter into settlement.

In the aforementioned application for recognition and enforcement of an Australian arbitration award, the parties re-established their cooperation through settlement, and combined the resolution of the dispute with their long-term interests, leading to a win-win result.

Further, the confidentiality of the conciliation process could avoid unwanted disclosure of business secrets and other information, and reduce damage to public relations and other negative impacts that may be caused by the disclosure of the dispute.

The confidentiality of arbitration does not apply to judicial review and enforcement procedure, and thus the dispute and the result would go to the public domain in these procedures and even result in a media trial, which is unwanted by both parties. Conciliation process, the settlement agreement and other related information are generally kept confidential, which is helpful for the parties to give and take more rationally and restore peace. The parties in the two aforementioned cases, not only successfully avoided disclosure of business information through settlement, but also protected their public image from intervention of the media.

In addition, post-award settlement is more flexible and efficient while less cost-consuming. The conciliation process is very flexible, convenient and efficient in its setting of form, place and period; and the settlement agreement would save a lot of time, money and energy that would be consumed in judicial procedures.

In the aforesaid arbitration arising under a confidentiality agreement, if the parties continued the arbitration and relevant judicial proceedings, a considerable amount of legal costs would be incurred, and the key technical team of both parties would have to input a lot of time and energy to cope with the arbitration which would in turn influence their normal business and lead to a lose-lose result. The post-award settlement, releasing both of them from the case and allowing them to focus on the business, is a wise choice.

III. Approaches for Post-Award Settlement

Selecting the appropriate approach towards settlement depends on the particular circumstance of each case.

  1. Party-to-Party Negotiation
  2. In a voluntary negotiation, the parties would be able to manage their negotiation process and are more likely to go beyond the dispute and take their commercial needs into consideration. Furthermore, face-to-face negotiation would reduce worries and misunderstandings. The shortcoming is that parties would be more reluctant to compromise and the process may be relatively long.

    In the case where parties have good negotiation powers and skills and can control their moods and information, party-to-party negotiation is a good approach; and in the case where it is possible for the parties to continue their cooperation in the future, it is highly recommended for the parties to rebuild their relations through this process.

  1. Third-Party Mediation
  2. Third-party mediation of commercial disputes normally involves a professional mediator or mediation institute in the process, employing their professional experience and judgment to find a possible solution for the parties.

    Mediators are professionals specially trained, with legal background or knowledge of a particular industry, and bound by professional disciplines and ethics. Sometimes the mediator would be a person respected and trusted by both parties, which encourages open and honest discussion. The mediator acts like a diplomat: on one side, he exchanges information and ideas with parties through face-to-face discussions, trying to understand the true needs of the parties fully and in depth and to find a mutually acceptable balance; on the other side, he needs to guide the parties to compromise with each other and promote the final settlement.

    In the case where there is still intense confrontation and strong emotions, entrusting an independent mediator as a go-between for the parties to the mediation is a better choice.

    If the award has entered into judicial proceedings, the settlement can be conducted under the supervision of the court. The professional ability, life experiences and mediation skills, along with the judicial resource he possess, would be a treasure for the settlement process.

  1. Enhancement Mechanism for Settlement Agreements
  2. If the debtor fails to honor its obligation under the post-award settlement agreement, the creditor is able to enforce the binding arbitral award without entering into a new proceeding for the same subject matter of the arbitral award, making breach of the settlement agreement a less-likely option for the debtor. Therefore, post-award settlement is more likely to be honored by the debtor.

    If the award has been submitted to judicial procedure, and the performance of the settlement takes a comparatively long period, the applicant may be unwilling to withdraw its application. In such cases, parties may request the court to grant a stay of the proceedings, or issue a suspension ruling as the case so requires.

    Setting-aside and recognition proceedings are trial processes instead of enforcement proceedings. Thus when suspending the proceedings, "Suspension of Litigation" under Article 136 of the Civil Procedure Law, rather than "Suspension of Enforcement" under Article 232, shall apply. Article 136 further provides that litigation shall be resumed after the grounds for suspension disappears.

    For matters not covered by the arbitral award, the parties may make use of an enhanced mechanism for the settlement agreement such as notarization and judicial confirmation. A judicial confirmation mechanism is provided in Article 20 of Several Opinions on Establishing and Improving the Resolution System for Disputes by Linking Litigation and Non-litigation Cases (Fa fa [2009] No.45, issued by the SPC on 4 August 2009), which says: "for an agreement in the nature of a civil contract reached through mediation by an administrative organ, a people's mediation organization, a commercial mediation organization, an industrial mediation organization or any other organization with a mediation function, the parties may apply to the people's court having jurisdiction for confirming the validity of such an agreement after the mediation organization and mediator affix their signatures or seals to it."

IV. Conclusion

Post-award settlement provides an efficient, convenient and secure way for creditors to realize their rights and can be widely used in the resolution of international commercial disputes. In China, where there is a long-history of a culture of conciliation and huge market opportunities, post-award settlement may serve as a wise choice in many occasions.


1 Partial awards, though rendered by the tribunal with respect to part of the dispute between the parties, are final and binding. Different from interim awards or interlocutory awards, conclusions in partial awards would not be altered by the final awards.

2 However, time limitation for enforcement under the law of the enforcing jurisdiction still applies to the enforcement of arbitral award and expiration of the limitation may lead to the award though recognized, but unable to be enforced. Limitation is generally regarded not violating the New York Convention, as Article III of the Convention clearly prescribes that each contracting state shall "enforce them in accordance with the rules of procedure of the territory where the award is relied upon". In China, the SPC Reply regarding Bunge S.A.'s Application for Recognition and Enforcement of English Arbitral Award ([2006] Min Si Ta Zi No.47, issued on 8 May 2007) has clarified that an application for recognition is not restricted by the limitation, but an application for enforcement should be brought out before the limitation period expires.

3 R Bose, N Yap & A Jaliwala, "Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards in Asia- Paying Lip Service to the New York Convention", International Congress of Maritime Arbitrators, XVI Congress Papers, Singapore, 2007.

4 See the SPC Reply on Whether JV Companies Is Able to Sue Shareholders for Liability for Breach of Contract of Shareholder's Non-fulfillment of Their Contribution Obligations and Whether Arbitration Agreement in JV Contracts Bind the JV Companies([2004] Min Si Ta Zi No.41). In the former case, the JV company sued a shareholder for breach of contract due to non-fulfillment of its contribution obligations, and the shareholder raised challenge to jurisdiction invoking the arbitration clause. The SPC held that JV company was not a party to the JV contract and thus not bound by the arbitration agreement, and thus rejected the challenge. In the later case, the tribunal for a dispute under a JV contract exercised jurisdiction over the dispute between the investor and the JV company. The SPC held that the arbitration clause in the JV contract could not bind the lease contract dispute between the investors and the JV company, and the tribunal's decision over the lease contract dispute exceeded the scope of the arbitration clause in the JV contract.

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.

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”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). 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 & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd 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 or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.