The Supreme People’s Court instructed the appellate court not to deny enforcement of an SCC award on public policy grounds. The award had denied the substantive claims of the present respondent in respect of defects of purchased equipment, which had caused pollution and potential health damage, and had directed the respondent to pay the costs incurred by the present petitioner in the arbitration. The Court explained that, while there could be multiple reasons for the equipment’s malfunctioning, the respondent had chosen to commence arbitration in respect of its quality – a dispute covered by the valid arbitration clause in the parties’ contract; hence, the respondent had to comply with the outcome of that arbitration. The Court found that though the merits of the award were alleged to be unfair, this did not constitute a violation of the fundamental interests of Chinese society, general principles of law, or good morals. (See PR China no. 35 for a later decision in this case.)