Guiding Case No. 235: Summary and
Principles on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments†
Table of Contents
Estimated Reading Time
- 5.6 min
Key Facts
In 2010, a shipping company in Norway signed a set of contracts with a logistics company in Shanghai, China, stipulating that English law was to be applied to lawsuits arising from the contracts and such lawsuits were to be adjudicated by the High Court of Justice in England (“High Court”). Subsequently, a dispute arose between the two parties. The Norwegian company filed, in accordance with the contracts, a lawsuit with the High Court against the Shanghai company, and ultimately won in both the High Court1 and the Court of Appeal in England2. The Shanghai company failed to perform its obligations specified in the English courts’ judgments and related orders. The Norwegian company, therefore, requested that the Shanghai Maritime Court recognize these judgments and orders.
Legal Issue(s)
“[…], can English courts’ judgments and related orders still be recognized by Chinese courts?”
China and the United Kingdom have not concluded or acceded to any international treaty on the mutual recognition and enforcement of court judgments and rulings, nor have they established such a reciprocal relationship through judicial practice. Under this circumstance, can English courts’ judgments and related orders still be recognized by Chinese courts?
Legal Rule(s)
Article 299 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China provides:3
Where a people’s court, after examining an application or a request for recognition and enforcement of a legally effective judgment or ruling rendered by a foreign court in accordance with an international treaty concluded or acceded to by the People’s Republic of China or in accordance with the principle of reciprocity, decides that [the judgment or ruling] neither violates the basic principles of the law of the People’s Republic of China nor undermines the sovereignty, security, or social public interests of the State, [the people’s court] shall rule to recognize the validity of the judgment or ruling. If enforcement [of the judgment or ruling] is required, [the people’s court] shall issue an enforcement order to carry out the enforcement in accordance with relevant provisions of this Law.
The content of Article 289 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China (amended in 2021), which was applied to this case, was substantively the same as the above paragraph.
Application of the Legal Rule(s)
According to the legal rules stated above, when examining a legally effective civil judgment or ruling rendered by a foreign court for which recognition and enforcement is applied or requested, a people’s court shall follow the relevant international treaty between China and the foreign country. If there is no such treaty between the two countries, the examination shall be conducted in accordance with the “principle of reciprocity”.
“[…], the Shanghai Maritime Court, which adjudicated this case, decided that prior recognition and enforcement of a Chinese court’s civil judgment or ruling by a court in a foreign country was not a necessary condition for establishing a reciprocal relationship between China and the foreign country.”
However, Chinese law does not have any provision on how to determine the existence of a “reciprocal relationship” between China and a foreign country. In this regard, the Shanghai Maritime Court, which adjudicated this case, decided that prior recognition and enforcement of a Chinese court’s civil judgment or ruling by a court in a foreign country was not a necessary condition for establishing a reciprocal relationship between China and the foreign country. The Shanghai Maritime Court further decided that such a reciprocal relationship exists so long as a court in the foreign country can, in accordance with the law of that foreign country, recognize and enforce a Chinese court’s civil judgment or ruling and that country has no precedent showing refusal by a court of that foreign country to recognize and enforce a Chinese court’s civil judgment or ruling on the grounds that there is no reciprocal relationship between China and the foreign country.
Conclusion
Ultimately, the Shanghai Maritime Court rendered a ruling in 2022, supporting the Norwegian company’s application. Thereafter, the Supreme People’s Court of China released this case as Guiding Case No. 235, affirming the reasoning of the Shanghai Maritime Court and summarizing it in the following “Main Points of the Adjudication” to provide guidance to all the courts in China:
When a people’s court determines, in its examination of an application or a request for recognition and enforcement of a foreign court’s civil judgment or ruling, whether there is a reciprocal relationship [between China and the foreign country], the relevant foreign court’s prior recognition and enforcement of a people’s court’s civil judgment or ruling is not a necessary condition [for establishing such a reciprocal relationship].
If, according to the law of the relevant [foreign] country, a civil judgment or ruling rendered by a people’s court can be recognized and enforced by a court of that country, and that country has no precedent refusing to recognize and enforce a people’s court’s judgment or ruling on the grounds that there is no reciprocal relationship [between China and the foreign country], it can be determined that there is a reciprocal relationship between China and the [foreign] country regarding the recognition and enforcement of civil judgments and rulings.
- The citation of this case summary is: David Wei Zhao, Guiding Case No. 235: Summary and Principles on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, SINOTALKS.COM®, SinoRules&Cases™, Jan. 15, 2025, https://sinotalks.com/sinorulescases/guiding-case-235-summary-english. The English version of this summary was edited by Nathan Harpainter and Dr. Mei Gechlik.
Guiding Case No. 235 (A Case Concerning S Shipping AS’s Application for Recognition of Foreign Courts’ Civil Judgments), discussed and passed by the Adjudication Committee of the Supreme People’s Court, released on Nov. 25, 2024, https://www.chinacourt.org/article/detail/2024/11/id/8220820.shtml. ↩︎
- Spar Shipping AS v Grand China Logistics Holding (Group) Co. Ltd., [2015] EWHC 718 (Comm), rendered by the High Court of Justice in England on Mar. 18, 2015, https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/comm/2015/718. ↩︎
- Grand China Logistics Holding (Group) Co. Ltd v Spar Shipping AS (Rev 1), [2016] EWCA Civ 982, rendered by the Court of Appeal in England on Oct. 7, 2016, https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/civ/2016/982 ↩︎
- 《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》(Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China), passed on, issued on, and effective as of Apr. 9, 1991, amended five times, most recently on Sept. 1, 2023, effective as of Jan. 1, 2024, https://www.ssf.gov.cn/portal/rootfiles/2023/11/14/1701622126444477-1701622126462201.pdf ↩︎
Related Articles
Contact Us
Services
