China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

China Enforces a French Judgment for the Third Time

Sun, 09 Jul 2023
Categories: Insights

avatar

Key takeaways:

  • In 2020, the Beijing Fourth Intermediate People’s Court ruled to recognize and enforce a monetary judgment (ordonnance) of the Commercial Court of Paris, France.
  • This is the third time that a Chinese court has recognized and enforced a French judgment, and the second time that a Chinese court has recognized and enforced a judgment of the Paris Commercial Court.
  • In this case, the Chinese court granted an application for interim measures (preservation of property).

At the end of 2020, the Beijing Fourth Intermediate People’s Court (the “Beijing Court”) recognized and enforced a monetary judgment (ordonnance) of the Commercial Court of Paris, France.

We obtained the information about this case from a press conference held by the Beijing Court on 28 Dec. 2022, but the original judgment is currently unavailable.

This case was published as one of the “Top Ten Enforcement Cases on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and Court Judgments by the Beijing Fourth Intermediate People’s Court”.

Ⅰ. Case Overview

At the end of 2020, the Beijing Fourth Intermediate People’s Court ruled to recognize and enforce the judgment (ordonnance) issued by the Paris Commercial Court on 3 June 2015, which approved a settlement agreement and granted enforceability of the settlement agreement. The case amount was more than 46 million USD.

In a previous post, we introduced the interim measures taken by the Beijing Court in the enforcement process of this case. More information about the case has been disclosed by the Beijing Court.

Related Post:

In this case, a limited company and Wu signed a Letter of Intent, pursuant to which Wu shall pay more than USD 46 million to the limited company. The Paris Commercial Court issued a judgment (ordonnance) granting the Letter of Intent enforceability. After the issuance of the judgment, Wu failed to make payment in accordance with the deadline stipulated in the Letter of Intent.

As Wu’s property is located in Beijing, the limited company applied to the Beijing Court for recognition and enforcement of the above-mentioned ruling (including the Letter of Intent granted with enforceability). After examining the application, the Beijing Court ruled to recognize and enforce the ruling issued by the Paris Commercial Court.

Since the Respondent, Wu, failed to comply with the ruling rendered by the Beijing Court, the Beijing Court took measures to restrict high-level consumption against the Respondent and enforce his equity interest in a company in Fujian Province, China. However, due to the unsuccessful price valuation of such equity interest, the enforcement failed.

Finally, Beijing Court only enforced the insurance policy in the name of the Respondent with a value of CNY 190,000 (approx. USD 27,144).

Ⅱ. Our Comments

This is the third time that a Chinese court has recognized and enforced a French judgment, and the second time that a Chinese court has recognized and enforced a judgment of the Paris Commercial Court.

Prior to this, China has twice recognized and enforced French judgments. For details, please see our posts below:

China and France have concluded a judicial assistance treaty on mutual recognition of civil and commercial judgments, which clears the way for the recognition and enforcement of French judgments in China.

 

Photo by Bundo Kim on Unsplash

Contributors: Guodong Du 杜国栋 , Meng Yu 余萌

Save as PDF

You might also like

Authenticating Documents for Use in Chinese Courts: Apostille or Not?

The 1961 Apostille Convention, effective in China as of November 2023, simplifies the authentication of foreign documents for use in Chinese courts by replacing traditional consular legalization with apostille. Note that authentication is only required for certain types of documents under Chinese law, and the apostille process applies only when the 1961 Convention is relevant.

Chinese Court Refuses to Recognize Russian Judgment Due to Due Process

In 2020, a local Chinese court in Beijing ruled against the recognition and enforcement of a Russian monetary judgment on the grounds that the party in absentia had not been properly summoned (the case of Chepetsky Mechanical Plant Joint-Stock Company (2020) Jing 04 Xie Wai Ren No. 2).

First Thai Monetary Judgment Enforced in China, Highlighting Presumptive Reciprocity in China-ASEAN Region

In 2024, a local Chinese court in Nanning, Guangxi, ruled to recognize and enforce a Thai monetary judgment. Apart from being the first case of enforcing Thai monetary judgments in China, it is also the first publicly reported case confirming a reciprocal relationship based on “presumptive reciprocity” (Guangxi Nanning China Travel Service Co., Ltd. v. Orient Thai Airlines Co., Ltd. (2023) Gui 71 Xie Wai Ren No. 1).