- You are here:
- Home
- Court Decisions
- CHINA PR 2026-1
CHINA PR 2026-1
Intermediate People’s Court, Wuxi, Jiangsu Province, 27 November 2024
(Equipment Company v. Company at Jiangyin City, Jiangsu Province)
... Read more
Intermediate People’s Court, Wuxi, Jiangsu Province, 27 November 2024
(Equipment Company v. Company at Jiangyin City, Jiangsu Province)
Topics: 101, 301, 306, 401, 502, 509, 524
CHINA PR 2026-1
The Court granted recognition and enforcement of an SCC award rendered in Singapore, rejecting the defendant’s argument that it had not been given proper notice of the arbitration because it had not received the arbitration documents. The Court noted that courier delivery had simply been refused, which did not invalidate service. Further objections were rejected because they related to the merits of the award; also, it was irrelevant that the items for which enforcement was sought did exactly replicate the award.
The court discusses the determination and relevance of the place where the award was made (in a foreign State or another contracting State.
The court discusses the principle that the procedure for the enforcement of awards under the Convention is governed by the lex fori, as well as procedural issues (such as the competent enforcement court) not falling under the specific cases of ¶¶ 302-307.
The court discusses the applicable period of limitation for seeking enforcement of an award.
The court discusses the general conditions the Convention imposes on a petitioner for seeking recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award – namely, the submission of the original arbitration agreement or arbitral award or a certified copy thereof – and examines in general whether these conditions were complied in the case at issue.
The court discusses the principle that the merits of the award may not be reviewed and that the court may only carry out a limited review of the award to ascertain grounds for refusal.
Due process: The court discusses what constitutes “proper notice” of the appointment of the arbitrators or of the arbitration proceedings.
Public policy: The court discusses the effect of other alleged violations of public policy on the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, such as contradictory reasons, manifest disregard of the law (US), etc.