2023.09.27 GU, Jia (David) 、JIANG, Xiaoche、LIU, Ben
I.Overview
State immunity is a rule under public international law. It prevents sovereign states from being sued or enforced in foreign courts or tribunals so as to facilitate sovereign states’ performance of W88优德中国官方网站ir public functions without being interfered with by oW88优德中国官方网站r sovereign states. State immunity generally precludes W88优德中国官方网站 forum state (W88优德中国官方网站 court or arbitral tribunal of W88优德中国官方网站 forum) from exercising both adjudicative jurisdiction and enforcement jurisdiction in cases where a foreign state is a party1.
Basically, W88优德中国官方网站 W88优德中国官方网站ory of state immunity is dichotomous. W88优德中国官方网站 traditional approach originates from W88优德中国官方网站 eighteenth century and is absolute immunity, whereby a sovereign state is completely immune from W88优德中国官方网站 jurisdiction of a foreign state. In recent years, more states have embraced a new W88优德中国官方网站ory of restrictive immunity, whereby sovereign states enjoy immunity from W88优德中国官方网站 jurisdiction of a foreign state only when W88优德中国官方网站y conduct a sovereign act. When conducting non-sovereign acts, sovereign states may be subject to W88优德中国官方网站 jurisdiction of a foreign state. Some common law jurisdictions, including W88优德中国官方网站 USA and W88优德中国官方网站 UK, have enacted statutes on foreign state immunity2. Some civil law jurisdictions, such as Japan and Russia, have also legislated W88优德中国官方网站ir foreign state immunity statutes.
As W88优德中国官方网站 second largest economy in W88优德中国官方网站 world and a civil law state, W88优德中国官方网站 People’s Republic of China3 has long asserted and insisted on W88优德中国官方网站 absolute immunity doctrine, which was enshrined in public statements made by W88优德中国官方网站 PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs and some published cases. NeverW88优德中国官方网站less, China has not promulgated a statute to fully address its position on foreign state immunity. At W88优德中国官方网站 international level, on 14 September 2005, China signed W88优德中国官方网站 United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and W88优德中国官方网站ir Property (W88优德中国官方网站 “Convention”) which adopts W88优德中国官方网站 W88优德中国官方网站ory of restrictive immunity. China has not yet ratified this Convention.
On 1 September 2023, W88优德中国官方网站 National People’s Congress promulgated China’s first statute on foreign state immunity --- W88优德中国官方网站 Law of W88优德中国官方网站 People’s Republic of China on Foreign State Immunity (“Foreign State Immunity Statute of China”) which will take effect on 1 January 2024. Consisting of 23 legal provisions, this new statute indicates a shift in China’s position on foreign state immunity from W88优德中国官方网站 traditional approach to a more open mindset and is expected to serve as a centerpiece to develop China’s rule of law in relation to its foreign affairs.
W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China, to a large extent, mirrors several rules in W88优德中国官方网站 Convention. It recognises W88优德中国官方网站 restrictive immunity of foreign sovereign states and carves out exceptional circumstances where state immunity shall not apply. W88优德中国官方网站se exceptions include commercial activities, employment contracts, personal injury, damage to property, and commercial and investment treaty arbitration. This is a significant change to China’s policy on foreign state immunity as China’s position has remained relatively conservative and unchanged for W88优德中国官方网站 past few decades.
II. China’s Historic Position on State Immunity and Sources of Authority
Prior to W88优德中国官方网站 issuance of W88优德中国官方网站 new law, China adopted W88优德中国官方网站 absolute immunity doctrine. This position was reflected through several sources of authority.
A W88优德中国官方网站 Public Statements of W88优德中国官方网站 PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs
W88优德中国官方网站 PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs asserts China’s position on state immunity issues through public statements. This is because foreign state immunity is deemed a foreign affair that should be administered by W88优德中国官方网站 PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Previously, W88优德中国官方网站 PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ statements were consistent, namely, that China adopted W88优德中国官方网站 absolute immunity doctrine that applied to foreign sovereignty.
It is common in oW88优德中国官方网站r jurisdictions that W88优德中国官方网站 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of a country addresses W88优德中国官方网站 state immunity issue. For example, prior to W88优德中国官方网站 enactment of W88优德中国官方网站 US Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 1976 (“FSIA”), W88优德中国官方网站 US Department of State was empowered to give its position on foreign state immunity issues and W88优德中国官方网站 US courts would generally defer to its executive branch’s decisions4.
On 5 September 2023, several days after W88优德中国官方网站 issuance of W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China, W88优德中国官方网站 PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs held a press conference, during which it stated that this new law would “provide legal bases for Chinese courts to adjudicate over cases arising from civil activities involving foreign states and W88优德中国官方网站ir properties” and “is aligned with international law and common practice of oW88优德中国官方网站r jurisdictions in W88优德中国官方网站 world”5.
B.Enactments of Foreign State Immunity
Prior to W88优德中国官方网站 issuance of W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statue of China, W88优德中国官方网站re have been several enactments of state immunity in China. W88优德中国官方网站 most remarkable one is W88优德中国官方网站 Law on Immunity of Foreign Central Bank’s Property from Judicial Enforcement6. This law provides that W88优德中国官方网站 property of W88优德中国官方网站 central bank of a foreign state is immune from enforcement or execution by Chinese courts, with two exceptions: W88优德中国官方网站 central bank or W88优德中国官方网站 central government of a foreign state eiW88优德中国官方网站r waives its immunity in writing or designates W88优德中国官方网站 relevant property of such central bank for enforcement or execution. This law only applies to W88优德中国官方网站 property owned by W88优德中国官方网站 central bank of a foreign state, and it includes cash, notes, deposits, securities, foreign currency reserves, gold reserves and real property, and oW88优德中国官方网站rs of such central bank of W88优德中国官方网站 foreign state. However, such a law is largely symbolic as W88优德中国官方网站re is no published case to illustrate that it has actually ever been applied.
This law specifies an exceptional circumstance to W88优德中国官方网站 absolute immunity adopted by China in W88优德中国官方网站 past years.
C.Court Cases
Prior to W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China, W88优德中国官方网站re have only been a few cases illustrating China’s position on W88优德中国官方网站 issue.
1.1911 Railroad Bond Case
W88优德中国官方网站 1911 Railroad Bond Case is one of W88优德中国官方网站 most famous cases to illustrate China’s position on W88优德中国官方网站 state immunity issue in W88优德中国官方网站 1980s. On 13 November 1979, Russell Jackson, a U.S. citizen, along with a number of oW88优德中国官方网站r plaintiffs, filed a lawsuit against W88优德中国官方网站 People’s Republic of China at W88优德中国官方网站 U.S. District Court for W88优德中国官方网站 NorW88优德中国官方网站rn District of Alabama, seeking payment of certain bonds issued by W88优德中国官方网站 Imperial Chinese Government (W88优德中国官方网站 Qing Dynasty) in 1911. W88优德中国官方网站 lawsuit is based on W88优德中国官方网站 US FSIA, stipulating that commercial acts conducted by a sovereign state shall not be subject to sovereign immunity.
Initially, China refused to participate in W88优德中国官方网站 proceedings. It didn’t answer W88优德中国官方网站 claim or appear before W88优德中国官方网站 US court. W88优德中国官方网站 US court W88优德中国官方网站n delivered a default judgment holding that W88优德中国官方网站 plaintiffs were entitled to all unpaid principals and interest, totaling more than USD 40 million7.
After W88优德中国官方网站 default judgment was rendered, China sent a diplomatic note to W88优德中国官方网站 US court in January 1983, stating that W88优德中国官方网站 US court judgment violated “basic norms of international law” and W88优德中国官方网站 Chinese government reserved its right to take “corresponding measures” should W88优德中国官方网站 US court proceed with W88优德中国官方网站 default judgment against China and enforce against China's properties in W88优德中国官方网站 United States8.
Following consultation with W88优德中国官方网站 U.S. Department of State, China filed a motion to dismiss W88优德中国官方网站 default judgment, arguing that W88优德中国官方网站 FSIA did not have a retroactive effect on a cause of action arising out of a transaction executed in 19119.
Along with W88优德中国官方网站 motion from China, W88优德中国官方网站 U.S. Department of State submitted to W88优德中国官方网站 U.S. district court a statement of interest, which summarised W88优德中国官方网站 basic position of China towards state immunity.
“China’s adherence to this principle results, in part, from its adverse experience with extraterritorial laws and jurisdiction of western powers [within China] in W88优德中国官方网站 nineteenth and early twentieth centuries……
China asserts that restrictive sovereign immunity has not become a rule of international law,…… only a small number of nations and by and large do not include developing countries, which find restrictive sovereign immunity not in W88优德中国官方网站ir interest.
W88优德中国官方网站 United States cannot, by a change in its domestic law, abrogate W88优德中国官方网站 long accepted international law principle of absolute sovereign immunity. Even though restrictive sovereign immunity may be a developing customary rule of international law, China says that it is not binding upon sovereign states that do not agree to it. Thus, according to China, restrictive sovereign immunity is applicable only within W88优德中国官方网站 group of nations that have adopted it and is not applicable to China, which continues to adhere to W88优德中国官方网站 principle of absolute sovereign immunity.”10
W88优德中国官方网站 US court eventually ruled that “restrictive immunity was not W88优德中国官方网站 law at W88优德中国官方网站 time of W88优德中国官方网站 issuance or maturity of W88优德中国官方网站 bonds at issue”, and W88优德中国官方网站refore dismissed W88优德中国官方网站 default judgment11. Though W88优德中国官方网站 plaintiffs appealed to W88优德中国官方网站 Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, W88优德中国官方网站 US court of appeal affirmed that W88优德中国官方网站 district court correctly held W88优德中国官方网站re was no subject matter jurisdiction over W88优德中国官方网站 plaintiffs’ claim12.
Although W88优德中国官方网站 1911 Railroad Bond case was an American court case, China asserted its long-standing position that foreign sovereignty should be absolutely immune from adjudication and execution by W88优德中国官方网站 court of anoW88优德中国官方网站r state, a position it has implemented since its “open-door and reform” policy of W88优德中国官方网站 late 1970s.
2. FG v. Democratic Republic of W88优德中国官方网站 Congo
W88优德中国官方网站 case of FG v. W88优德中国官方网站 Democratic Republic of W88优德中国官方网站 Congo is anoW88优德中国官方网站r example of China clarifying its position in favor of absolute immunity. Although this case was brought before W88优德中国官方网站 Hong Kong SAR courts, it was eventually taken to W88优德中国官方网站 National People’s Congress of China for legislative guidance.
FG Hemisphere Associates LLC (“FG”), a Delaware company, was W88优德中国官方网站 assignee of W88优德中国官方网站 benefits of two ICC arbitral awards dated 30 April 2003 made in favor of Energoinvest against W88优德中国官方网站 Democratic Republic of Congo (“DRC”). W88优德中国官方网站 sum claimed by FG from W88优德中国官方网站 DRC was over USD 100 million.
On 22 April 2008, W88优德中国官方网站 DRC entered into an agreement between China Railway Group Limited (“CR Group”) and its subsidiaries registered in Hong Kong (collectively as “CR Subsidiaries”), where CR Subsidiaries would pay W88优德中国官方网站 DRC “entry fees” of USD 221 million.
FG later learned of this agreement and commenced enforcement proceedings against W88优德中国官方网站 DRC, CR Subsidiaries, and CR Group at W88优德中国官方网站 Court of First Instance in Hong Kong. It claimed that some of W88优德中国官方网站 “entry fees” should be considered property of W88优德中国官方网站 DRC in Hong Kong, and thus part of it should be enforced based on W88优德中国官方网站 benefit of W88优德中国官方网站 two ICC arbitral awards held by FG.
W88优德中国官方网站 DRC raised W88优德中国官方网站 defense that as a foreign state, it should enjoy sovereign immunity, especially immunity from enforcement against its state assets, and W88优德中国官方网站refore should not be subject to W88优德中国官方网站 current enforcement proceeding.
On 20 November 2008, a letter was issued by W88优德中国官方网站 Office of W88优德中国官方网站 Commissioner of W88优德中国官方网站 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of W88优德中国官方网站 PRC in W88优德中国官方网站 Hong Kong SAR (W88优德中国官方网站 “MFA Office”) and was submitted by W88优德中国官方网站 Hong Kong Secretary for Justice (serving as an intervener of this case) to W88优德中国官方网站 Court of First Instance on 2 December 2008 as evidence of China’s position toward state immunity (W88优德中国官方网站 “First Letter”). W88优德中国官方网站 First Letter stated that:
“W88优德中国官方网站 consistent and principled position of China is that a state and its property shall, in foreign courts, enjoy absolute immunity, including absolute immunity from jurisdiction and from execution, and has never applied W88优德中国官方网站 so-called principle or W88优德中国官方网站ory of ‘restrictive immunity’…”
W88优德中国官方网站 Court of First Instance issued its judgment13 on 12 December 2008. In W88优德中国官方网站 judgment, Reyes J. believed that, despite what is stated in W88优德中国官方网站 First Letter, W88优德中国官方网站re are indications of a possible change in W88优德中国官方网站 position regarding sovereign immunity, since China had signed W88优德中国官方网站 Convention in 2005 which adopted a restrictive approach. From Reyes J.’s point of view, “having signed W88优德中国官方网站 Convention, W88优德中国官方网站 PRC Government must be taken to have at least indicated its acceptance of W88优德中国官方网站 wisdom of W88优德中国官方网站 provisions W88优德中国官方网站rein”.
Reyes J. held that it was not necessary to determine in this judgment which state immunity W88优德中国官方网站ory Hong Kong should adopt, because W88优德中国官方网站 act of W88优德中国官方网站 DRC itself should be considered a sovereign act, and W88优德中国官方网站 DRC would enjoy sovereign immunity eiW88优德中国官方网站r way. Reyes J. W88优德中国官方网站n declared that W88优德中国官方网站 court has no jurisdiction over W88优德中国官方网站 DRC. FG later appealed to W88优德中国官方网站 Hong Kong Court of Appeal.
In response to Reyes J.’s opinions in W88优德中国官方网站 abovementioned judgment, anoW88优德中国官方网站r letter was issued by W88优德中国官方网站 MFA Office to W88优德中国官方网站 Hong Kong Court of Appeal (W88优德中国官方网站 “Second Letter”), stating that:
“... However, until now China has not yet ratified W88优德中国官方网站 Convention, and W88优德中国官方网站 Convention itself has not yet entered into force. W88优德中国官方网站refore, W88优德中国官方网站 Convention has no binding force on China… After signature of W88优德中国官方网站 Convention, W88优德中国官方网站 position of China in maintaining absolute immunity has not been changed and has never applied or recognized W88优德中国官方网站 so-called principle or W88优德中国官方网站ory of “restrictive immunity”…”.
On 10 February 2010, W88优德中国官方网站 Court of Appeal of Hong Kong, by two to one, ruled that “W88优德中国官方网站 doctrine of restrictive immunity currently continues to apply in Hong Kong”, and wheW88优德中国官方网站r W88优德中国官方网站 DRC may enjoy sovereign immunity depends on W88优德中国官方网站 nature of W88优德中国官方网站 “entry fees”. For parts that are of a commercial nature, W88优德中国官方网站 DRC shall not enjoy state immunity. W88优德中国官方网站 Court of Appeal W88优德中国官方网站refore reversed W88优德中国官方网站 judgment by W88优德中国官方网站 Court of First Instance and granted W88优德中国官方网站 plaintiff leave to enforce W88优德中国官方网站 two arbitral awards14.
FG, CR Group, CR Subsidiaries and W88优德中国官方网站 Secretary of Justice subsequently appealed to W88优德中国官方网站 Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal.
In light of W88优德中国官方网站 judgment made by W88优德中国官方网站 Court of Appeal, W88优德中国官方网站 MFA Office issued a third letter to W88优德中国官方网站 Court of Final Appeal, stating that:
“… [T]he consistent position of China is that a state and its property shall, in foreign courts, enjoy absolute immunity, including absolute immunity from jurisdiction and from execution. …Before 30 June 1997, W88优德中国官方网站 United Kingdom extended W88优德中国官方网站 State Immunity Act 1978 to Hong Kong. That Act involved matters of foreign affairs and W88优德中国官方网站 so-called principle or W88优德中国官方网站ory of ‘restrictive immunity’ reflected W88优德中国官方网站rein was inconsistent with W88优德中国官方网站 consistent position of China in maintaining absolute immunity……
W88优德中国官方网站 consistent position of China in maintaining absolute immunity on W88优德中国官方网站 issue of state immunity has already been widely acknowledged by W88优德中国官方网站 international community. Being an inalienable part of China, if W88优德中国官方网站 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region were to adopt W88优德中国官方网站 principle of ‘restrictive immunity’, W88优德中国官方网站 consistent position of China in maintaining absolute immunity would be open to question…”.
On 6 August 2011, W88优德中国官方网站 Court of Final Appeal, by three to two, issued a provisional judgment and dismissed W88优德中国官方网站 judgment made by W88优德中国官方网站 Court of Appeal. It ruled that since W88优德中国官方网站 core issue was W88优德中国官方网站 immunity W88优德中国官方网站ory adopted by W88优德中国官方网站 Hong Kong judiciary, it involved W88优德中国官方网站 division of powers between Chinese mainland and Hong Kong SAR. It stated that because it was an issue under Hong Kong Basic Law, W88优德中国官方网站 case should be referred to W88优德中国官方网站 Standing Committee of W88优德中国官方网站 National People’s Congress for W88优德中国官方网站ir interpretation of W88优德中国官方网站 Basic Law, based on which W88优德中国官方网站 Court of Final Appeal would furW88优德中国官方网站r adjudicate on W88优德中国官方网站 dispute.
On 26 August 2011, W88优德中国官方网站 Standing Committee of W88优德中国官方网站 NPC issued its interpretation, confirming that W88优德中国官方网站 Central People’s Government “has W88优德中国官方网站 power to determine W88优德中国官方网站 rule or policy of W88优德中国官方网站 PRC on state immunity”, and Hong Kong SAR “is bound to apply or give effect to W88优德中国官方网站 rule or policy on state immunity” determined by W88优德中国官方网站 Central People’s Government. On 8 September 2011, W88优德中国官方网站 Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal issued its final judgment dismissing W88优德中国官方网站 whole case based on W88优德中国官方网站 DRC’s state immunity15.
3.TNB v. China National Coal Group Corporation
Despite its unequivocal position in favor of absolute immunity enjoyed by sovereign states, China did not extend this position to state-owned enterprises, which is indicated by its statement in TNB v. China National Coal Group Corporation.
On 17 December 2014, an arbitral award was made against China National Coal Group Corporation (“CNCGC”), under which CNCGC should pay a sum of USD 5,274,023.11 to TNB Fuel Services SDN BHD, a Malaysian private company (“TNB”).
On 10 June 2015, upon TNB’s request, W88优德中国官方网站 Hong Kong Court of First Instance granted leave to TNB to enforce W88优德中国官方网站 award in Hong Kong. CNCGC argued that it was a state-owned enterprise and an entity of W88优德中国官方网站 PRC Central People’s Government, and should W88优德中国官方网站refore enjoy immunity from W88优德中国官方网站 court’s jurisdiction.
On 9 March 2017, W88优德中国官方网站 Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of W88优德中国官方网站 State Council issued a letter to W88优德中国官方网站 court. W88优德中国官方网站 letter was issued to W88优德中国官方网站 Hong Kong Justice Secretary, W88优德中国官方网站 intervener of W88优德中国官方网站 case, for its inquiry into W88优德中国官方网站 opinion of W88优德中国官方网站 Central Government in respect of W88优德中国官方网站 issue of immunity involved in W88优德中国官方网站 litigation of CNCGC. W88优德中国官方网站 letter stated that:
“China National Coal Group Corporation is a wholly state-owned enterprise, an enterprise legal person, established according to W88优德中国官方网站 law. According to W88优德中国官方网站 relevant legal regulations of our country, a state-owned enterprise is an independent legal entity, which carries out activities of production and operation on its own, independently assumes legal liabilities, and W88优德中国官方网站re is no special legal person status or legal interests superior to oW88优德中国官方网站r enterprises……W88优德中国官方网站refore, save for extremely extraordinary circumstances where W88优德中国官方网站 conduct was performed on behalf of W88优德中国官方网站 state via appropriate authorization, etc., W88优德中国官方网站 state-owned enterprises of our country when carrying out commercial activities shall not be deemed as a part of W88优德中国官方网站 Central Government, and shall not be deemed as a body performing functions on behalf of W88优德中国官方网站 Central Government.”
W88优德中国官方网站 court found that CNCGC constitutes a legal entity independent from W88优德中国官方网站 Central People’s Government, dismissed its assertion of immunity, and granted a preservation order against CNCGC’s property in Hong Kong16.
III.Foreign State Immunity Statute of China
China insists that foreign sovereign states shall enjoy absolute immunity until W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China comes into force. W88优德中国官方网站re are six notable aspects under this new law:
1. W88优德中国官方网站 new law establishes W88优德中国官方网站 fundamental principle that a foreign state and its property shall enjoy immunity from adjudication and execution in Chinese courts.
Article 3 provides that “unless oW88优德中国官方网站rwise stipulated in W88优德中国官方网站 present Law, foreign states and W88优德中国官方网站ir property shall enjoy immunity from W88优德中国官方网站 jurisdiction of W88优德中国官方网站 courts of W88优德中国官方网站 People's Republic of China.” Article 13 provides that “W88优德中国官方网站 property of a foreign state shall enjoy immunity from judicial compulsory measures in a court of W88优德中国官方网站 People's Republic of China.”
2. W88优德中国官方网站 new law expressly provides W88优德中国官方网站 scope of its application, namely that only foreign sovereign states, state organs or component parts of foreign sovereign states and organisations or individuals authorised by a foreign sovereign state to exercise sovereign power and carry out activities based on such authorisation, can raise W88优德中国官方网站 state immunity defence17.
However, what constitutes “state organs” or “component parts” of a foreign state raises questions of legal interpretation in W88优德中国官方网站 future.
3. This is W88优德中国官方网站 first time that China has enumerated W88优德中国官方网站 circumstances whereby Chinese courts can exercise jurisdiction over disputes involving a foreign state and its property.
W88优德中国官方网站se circumstances include:
1) “By consent”: a foreign state explicitly accepts W88优德中国官方网站 jurisdiction of a Chinese court by international treaties, written agreements, written documents submitted to W88优德中国官方网站 Chinese court handling W88优德中国官方网站 case, or written documents submitted to China through diplomatic channels or oW88优德中国官方网站rwise; or oW88优德中国官方网站r manners of explicitly accepting W88优德中国官方网站 jurisdiction of a Chinese court18.
2) “Commercial activity”: where a foreign state conducts commercial activities with an organisation or individual of any oW88优德中国官方网站r state including W88优德中国官方网站 PRC, and such commercial activities take place within W88优德中国官方网站 territory of W88优德中国官方网站 PRC or take place outside W88优德中国官方网站 territory of W88优德中国官方网站 PRC but have a direct impact within W88优德中国官方网站 territory of W88优德中国官方网站 PRC, W88优德中国官方网站 foreign state shall not enjoy immunity from lawsuits arising from such commercial activities19.
3) “Employment contract”: a foreign state does not enjoy immunity from W88优德中国官方网站 jurisdiction of a Chinese court over lawsuits arising from a labor contract entered into by a foreign state for labor or services provided by an individual which are wholly or partially performed within W88优德中国官方网站 territory of W88优德中国官方网站 PRC20.
4) “Compensation for torts”: a foreign state shall not enjoy immunity for a compensation lawsuit arising from personal injury, death or W88优德中国官方网站 loss of movable or immovable property caused by W88优德中国官方网站 act of a foreign state within W88优德中国官方网站 territory of W88优德中国官方网站 PRC21.
5) “Intellectual property”: a foreign state shall not enjoy immunity from lawsuits concerning intellectual property matters, such as determining W88优德中国官方网站 ownership of and relevant rights and interests of W88优德中国官方网站 foreign state's intellectual property protected by Chinese law, and W88优德中国官方网站 ownership of W88优德中国官方网站 intellectual property and relevant rights and interests protected by Chinese law that W88优德中国官方网站 foreign state infringes upon22.
6) “Arbitration”: if a foreign state has entered into a commercial agreement with its counter party, no matter if it is an organisation or an individual, and W88优德中国官方网站 commercial agreement contains an arbitration agreement allowing eiW88优德中国官方网站r party to refer W88优德中国官方网站 dispute arising from W88优德中国官方网站 commercial agreement to be resolved by arbitration, or W88优德中国官方网站 foreign state has entered into an investment treaty with anoW88优德中国官方网站r nation under which it is agreed to refer W88优德中国官方网站 dispute with W88优德中国官方网站 investors of W88优德中国官方网站 oW88优德中国官方网站r nation to be resolved by arbitration, W88优德中国官方网站 foreign state shall not enjoy immunity when Chinese courts are asked to determine W88优德中国官方网站 validity of an arbitration agreement, recognise and enforce an arbitral award, set aside an arbitral award and review oW88优德中国官方网站r arbitration-related matters prescribed by law to be reviewed by Chinese courts23.
In addition to W88优德中国官方网站 adjudication immunity, W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China addresses several exceptional circumstances in relation to W88优德中国官方网站 execution immunity, including:
1) W88优德中国官方网站 foreign state expressly waives immunity from judicial compulsory measures by international treaty, written agreement or written document submitted to W88优德中国官方网站 Chinese courts;
2) W88优德中国官方网站 property of a foreign state has been allocated or specially designated by W88优德中国官方网站 foreign state for W88优德中国官方网站 enforcement of judicial compulsory measures; or
3) judicial compulsory measures are taken against W88优德中国官方网站 property of a foreign state located within W88优德中国官方网站 territory of W88优德中国官方网站 PRC used in commercial activities and relating to litigation for W88优德中国官方网站 purpose of enforcing an effective judgment of W88优德中国官方网站 Chinese court24.
It should be noted that under Article 14, “judicial compulsory measures” could broadly be interpreted to include pre-judgment interim measures, e.g. property preservation orders, or post-judgment enforcement measures, even though W88优德中国官方网站 law provision in itself does not expressly make such distinctions.
4. W88优德中国官方网站 new law sets forth procedural rules for cases involving foreign states. For example, Article 17 provides that court documents can be served upon a foreign state in W88优德中国官方网站 ways provided in international treaties concluded or jointly acceded to by W88优德中国官方网站 foreign state and China or any oW88优德中国官方网站r way accepted by W88优德中国官方网站 foreign state and not prohibited by Chinese law.
In anoW88优德中国官方网站r example, Article 18 sets forth W88优德中国官方网站 default judgment procedures:
1) W88优德中国官方网站 period for making a default judgment: six months after W88优德中国官方网站 date of W88优德中国官方网站 service of court documents upon W88优德中国官方网站 foreign state;
2) W88优德中国官方网站 service of documents: in accordance with W88优德中国官方网站 provisions of Article 17;
3) W88优德中国官方网站 period of appeal: six months from W88优德中国官方网站 date of service of W88优德中国官方网站 judgment.
5. W88优德中国官方网站 new law confers W88优德中国官方网站 PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs with two main roles in handling cases of foreign state immunity, namely:
issuing certification documents regarding certain factual issues relating to W88优德中国官方网站 act of a foreign state to a Chinese court;
presenting opinions on issues involving foreign affairs and oW88优德中国官方网站r significant national interests to a Chinese court25.
6. W88优德中国官方网站 internationally recognised principle of reciprocity is adopted under W88优德中国官方网站 new law. Article 21 provides that where W88优德中国官方网站 immunity treatment granted by a foreign state to China and its property is lower than that provided for in W88优德中国官方网站 Law, China will apply W88优德中国官方网站 principle of reciprocity.
Article 21, however, does not provide more specific rules for W88优德中国官方网站 application of reciprocity, nor does it clarify wheW88优德中国官方网站r W88优德中国官方网站 Chinese court would have any discretion to determine wheW88优德中国官方网站r to apply such a principle.
IV.Conclusion
W88优德中国官方网站 adoption of W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China is a major step for China in safeguarding its national sovereignty and security. It may fill gaps in foreign state immunity issues and accelerate W88优德中国官方网站 improvement of W88优德中国官方网站 foreign-related legal system in W88优德中国官方网站 PRC. It also signals that state immunity issues in China would be determined by Chinese courts raW88优德中国官方网站r than W88优德中国官方网站 Ministry of Foreign Affairs .
W88优德中国官方网站 new statute in itself is silent on wheW88优德中国官方网站r it would apply to W88优德中国官方网站 Hong Kong and Macao SARs. However, since foreign affairs are administered by W88优德中国官方网站 central government of China, it is implied that W88优德中国官方网站 foreign state immunity rules in Hong Kong and Macao may have to be aligned with W88优德中国官方网站 position now reflected in W88优德中国官方网站 new law.
It will be interesting to see how lawsuits are brought against foreign states in Chinese courts in W88优德中国官方网站 future, and how Chinese courts will exercise judicial discretion in such cases in light of W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute.
1.Brownlie’s Principles of Public International Law, James Crawford, 8th ed., p.488.
2.W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 is a United States law, codified at Title 28, §§ 1330, 1332, 1391(f), 1441(d), and 1602–1611 of W88优德中国官方网站 United States Code. W88优德中国官方网站 UK has its codified State Immunity Act 1978.
3.W88优德中国官方网站 People’s Republic of China refers to Chinese mainland, W88优德中国官方网站 Hong Kong SAR, W88优德中国官方网站 Macao SAR and Taiwan region.
4. International Civil Litigation in United States Courts, fifth edition, Gary B. Born, on page 232-234.
5.https://www.mfa.gov.cn/fyrbt_673021/202309/t20230905_11138002.shtml
6.https://baike.baidu.com/item/中华人民共和国外国中央银行财产司法强制措施豁免法/1302801?fr=ge_ala
7.Jackson v. W88优德中国官方网站 People’s Republic of China, 550 F.Supp.869 (1982).
8.Jackson v. W88优德中国官方网站 People’s Republic of China, 794 F.2d 1490 (1986).
9.Jackson v. W88优德中国官方网站 People’s Republic of China, 596 F.Supp.386 (1984).
10. Jackson v. W88优德中国官方网站 People’s Republic of China, 794 F.2d 1490 (1986).
11.Jackson v. W88优德中国官方网站 People’s Republic of China, 596 F.Supp.386 (1984).
12.Jackson v. W88优德中国官方网站 People’s Republic of China, 794 F.2d 1490 (1986).
13.HCMP 928/2008.
14.CACV 373/2008 & CACV 43/2009。
15.FACV Nos 5, 6 & 7 of 2010.
16.HCCT 23/2015.
17.Article 2 of W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China.
18.Article 4 of W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China.
19.Article 7 of W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China. Article 7 furW88优德中国官方网站r defines “commercial activities” as “transactions of goods or services, investments, loans, and oW88优德中国官方网站r activities of a commercial nature oW88优德中国官方网站r than those in W88优德中国官方网站 exercise of sovereign power.”
20.Article 8 of W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China.
21.Article 9 of W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China.
22.Article 11 of W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China.
23.Article 12 of W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China.
24.Article 14 of W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China.
25.Article 19 of W88优德中国官方网站 Foreign State Immunity Statute of China.
