Turning a blind eye to internationally-awarded interim measures
Foreign investors should consider opting to resolve disputes through Chinese domestic arbitration commissions as there is little chance that PRC courts will recognise or enforce internationally-awarded interim measures
Issue: June 2011
Keywords (click to search):
arbitration
awards
King & Wood
PRC courts
interim measures
Following the dramatic development of economic globalisation, numerous commercial disputes began to arise from the increasingly complicated nature of international trade. Arbitration has become one of the most favourable methods for foreign investors to settle disputes because it is distinctively efficient and arbitral awards are uniformly enforced. But the question remains regarding which arbitration body to go to: China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (Cietac), International Court of Arbitration (ICC), American Arbitration Association (AAA), Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC), Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) or any other international arbitration institutions? Due to cultural gaps, enhanced trust in their familiar arbitration institutions or even concerns about China’s legal environment, foreign investors or businessmen tend to choose foreign arbitration institutions rather than Cietac as the forum to resolve disputes among parties to relevant agreements.
Although Cietac is becoming more mature and sophisticated in its practice, admittedly some of the...
Please login or register below to read this article.