DetailsKolmar Group AG filed an application against Jiangsu Province Textile Industry (Group) Co., Ltd. to Nanjing Intermediate People¡¯s Court of Jiangsu Province for the recognition and enforcement of a judgment issued by the High Court of Singapore, Case No. O13 Civil Judgment, dated October 22, 2015.
The major argument in this case is whether a Chinese court could recognize and enforce a foreign judgment while there is no treaty between the two countries involving the content of mutual recognition and enforcement of court judgment.
The article 282 of Civil Procedure Law of China stipulates that ¡°In the case of an application or request for recognition and enforcement of a legally effective judgment or written order of a foreign court, the people's court shall, after conducting a review in accordance with the international treaties concluded or acceded to by the People's Republic of China or with the principle of reciprocity and arriving at the conclusion that it does not contradict the basic principles of the law of the People's Republic of China nor violates State sovereignty, security and social and public interest of the country, recognize the validity of the judgment or written order, and, if required, issue a writ of execution to enforce it in accordance with the relevant provisions of this Law;¡¡± In practice, Chinese court generally recognized and enforced foreign judgments based on the international treaties concluded by China and the relative country.
However, the Nanjing IPC held that, even there is no treaty between China and Singapore for the mutual recognition and enforcement of court judgment, the High Court of Singapore has ever recognized and enforced a judgment issued by Suzhou Intermediate People¡¯s Court of Jiangsu Province on January 2014. Thus, based on the principle of reciprocity, the Nanjing IPC could recognize a Singapore judgment if the judgment is qualified to be recognized and enforced in accordance with Chinese laws.
After reviewing the Singapore judgment, on December 9, 2016, Nanjing IPC handed down a decision (Case No. <2016> Su-01 Xie-Wai-Ren-3) held that the Singapore judgment shall be recognized and enforced based on the principle of reciprocity.
This was the first time where a Chinese court ruled for the recognition and enforcement of a Singaporean court judgment, and this was the first time where a Chinese court has recognized and enforced a foreign judgment on reciprocity principle in the absence of any international treaties between the two countries for the mutual recognition and enforcement of court judgment. This is a milestone decision in Chinese judicial practice, and this shall be a landmark development in China legal area.
However, it might be noted that, both Nanjing and Suzhou are within the jurisdiction of Jiangsu Province. Thus, it remains uncertain that, is the principle of reciprocity only applied within inter-provincial courts or it shall be applied all around the country? If a Singapore court recognizes a judgment handed down by a Jiangsu court, can a Hubei court recognize another Singapore judgment? No one knows the answer right now. Whatsoever, the Nanjing IPC¡¯s decision is absolutely a welcomed development for parties doing business in China, and we look forward to more improvement and progress in Chinese judicial development.