Originally from Between East and West: Essays in Honour of Ulf Franke

Preview Page
 

The Arbitration Institute of Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (“the SCC Institute”) has established a sustained and constructive relationship with China since the 1950s. In the 1980s, Sweden was the preferred arbitration center for Chinese companies due to its historic neutrality. The China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (“CIETAC”) concluded a cooperation agreement with the SCC Institute in 1984, only the fourth agreement that CIETAC has ever signed with foreign arbitration institutions. In 2008 alone, there were seven arbitrated cases involving a party from China.

Although the SCC Institute enjoyed a certain preference for arbitrations involving Chinese parties, the enforcement of SCC awards in China has not always been satisfactory to foreign creditors. Chinese courts cannot be considered to be friendly to arbitration. In the past ten years, Chinese local courts have attempted to refuse enforcement of four SCC awards. Two of these, based on the ground of violation of public policy, were not confirmed by the Chinese Supreme People’s Court (SPC), while the other two were refused enforcement because of procedural deficiencies.

After a brief introduction of the legal framework for enforcement of foreign awards in China (Section I), the present article will analyze and comment on the problems and particularities reflected in the four SCC cases which were submitted to SPC for enforcement in China by Chinese local courts (Section II); and finally, provide some thoughts for foreign creditors seeking enforcement of arbitral awards in China (Section III).