China: A Dispute Resolution (PRC Firms) Overview

China’s Dispute Resolution Landscape in 2025: Reform, Internationalisation and Institutional Diversification

In 2025, China’s dispute resolution landscape continued to evolve. Breakthroughs in legislative reform, more systematic judicial policy support, the growing prominence of international mediation mechanisms, and the further development of the international commercial court system together reflect China’s accelerating efforts to build a more mature, internationalised, and diversified ecosystem for commercial dispute resolution.

Arbitration reform became the centrepiece of 2025

The most significant development in 2025 was the adoption of the revised PRC Arbitration Law on 12 September 2025, with effect from 1 March 2026. This was the first comprehensive revision of China’s Arbitration Law in roughly three decades. The reform is intended to improve the foreign-related arbitration regime, enhance the credibility of arbitration, and promote innovative arbitration practices with Chinese characteristics that are aligned with international standards.

One of the most notable changes is the formal introduction of the special arbitration regime (akin to ad hoc arbitration) for the first time, filling the legislative gap in relation to ad hoc arbitration under China’s arbitration framework. This development marks a transition from local pilot experimentation to national statutory recognition. Under Article 82 of the revised Arbitration Law, parties may, in disputes concerning foreign-related maritime matters, as well as foreign-related disputes between enterprises registered in approved free trade pilot zones, the Hainan Free Trade Port and other designated regions authorised by the State Council, choose to constitute an arbitral tribunal outside a permanent arbitral institution and conduct arbitration in accordance with agreed rules. Compared with the ad hoc arbitration rules adopted during the pilot phase at the local level, the new special arbitration regime reflects a more calibrated legislative approach, balancing international trends with China’s domestic realities. Its application remains limited to specific categories of foreign-related disputes and designated regions, thereby leaving room for future institutional refinement.

The revised Arbitration Law also significantly strengthens judicial support for arbitral interim relief and improves the statutory framework for arbitration-related preservation measures. In particular, Article 39 expressly grants parties the right to apply for conduct preservation, enabling a party in arbitral proceedings to request that a court order the opposing party to take certain actions or refrain from taking certain actions. This represents a significant expansion beyond the previous focus on property and evidence preservation, and is expected to provide more timely and effective protection of parties’ legitimate interests, including by preventing dissipation of the subject matter in dispute or the further enlargement of losses.

For market participants, the significance of the 2025 reform lies not merely in any individual amendment, but in the broader signal it sends. Arbitration is being repositioned as a more modern, internationally compatible, and institutionally supported mechanism within China’s wider foreign-related rule-of-law agenda. In this sense, 2025 may be seen as a pivotal year in which the legislative foundations for the next stage of arbitration development in China were recalibrated.

Judicial quality and judicial support continued to improve

China’s judicial system also demonstrated continuing progress in both overall adjudicatory performance and institutional support for dispute resolution. On 24 February 2026, the Supreme People’s Court released the Annual Report on Civil and Commercial Adjudication of the People’s Courts (2025), which showed that courts nationwide accepted 6.791 million first-instance civil and commercial cases in 2025, representing a year-on-year increase of 22.0%, and concluded 6.536 million such cases, up 18.9% year on year. The mediation and withdrawal rate reached 42.33%; the appeal rate for first-instance cases fell to 2.88%, down 19.5% year on year; and the rate of petitions for retrial dropped to 0.46%, down 37%. These figures fully demonstrate the courts’ remarkable effectiveness in substantively resolving disputes and bringing controversies to an end.

According to the Annual Report on Judicial Review of Commercial Arbitration (2024), issued by the Supreme People’s Court on 28 December 2025, courts nationwide concluded 18,566 judicial review cases concerning commercial arbitration in 2024. Of the 11,016 applications to set aside arbitral awards, only 245 resulted in full or partial annulment, representing an annulment rate of 2.22%. The report also disclosed that, in 2024, Chinese courts concluded 42 cases involving applications for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, and none resulted in a refusal of recognition or enforcement.

Taken together, these developments and figures suggest that China’s courts are not only maintaining a pro-arbitration posture, but are also increasingly strengthening market confidence through greater judicial transparency, more detailed policy guidance, and a more restrained and predictable approach to judicial review.

Mediation emerged more prominently in the international dispute resolution narrative

Another notable development in 2025 was the marked rise of mediation in China’s cross-border dispute resolution landscape. On 30 May 2025, the signing ceremony of the Convention on the Establishment of the International Organization for Mediation (IOMed) was held in Hong Kong, China. Subsequently, on 20 October 2025, the inauguration ceremony of the IOMed was also held in Hong Kong, marking the formal commencement of operations of this newly established international organisation. The IOMed will complement existing international litigation and arbitration mechanisms and provide a new institutional platform for the peaceful resolution of international disputes.

This also indicates that, in addition to traditional litigation and arbitration mechanisms, China is taking a more active role in promoting the institutional development of non-adversarial dispute resolution methods, particularly mediation, in the context of international commercial and cross-border disputes. These developments further enrich the range of dispute resolution mechanisms available in China and enhance the appeal of its legal framework to international commercial users.

Regional dispute resolution hubs and institutional diversification gained momentum

Another noteworthy trend in 2025 was the continued development of regional dispute resolution hubs, together with the further diversification of the institutional platforms and service mechanisms that support them. International commercial centres represented by Shanghai, as well as the expanding network of international commercial tribunals and specialised courts, are increasingly becoming important vehicles through which national-level institutional arrangements are translated into practical dispute resolution capacity. On 14 May 2025, the Shanghai International Commercial Court, for the first time, supported evidence collection in an international commercial arbitration by issuing an investigation order, marking an important step forward in strengthening judicial support for international arbitration and fostering an arbitration-friendly legal environment in China.

More broadly, China’s international commercial adjudication infrastructure also continued to expand. China has now established international commercial tribunals in 18 cities, including Beijing, Shanghai and Suzhou. In 2025 alone, these tribunals concluded more than 1,700 foreign-related commercial and arbitration review cases involving parties from over 50 countries and regions, representing a year-on-year increase of 24%. These figures suggest that China’s effort to build preferred venues for international dispute resolution is no longer limited to the Supreme People’s Court and the China International Commercial Court at the apex level, but is increasingly being operationalised through a broader, city-based judicial network.

Conclusion

Taken together, the developments in 2025 indicate that China’s dispute resolution framework is continuing to evolve in a more mature, more internationalised, and more commercially responsive direction. For both domestic and international market participants, what merits closer attention is not any single isolated reform, but the steady strengthening of China’s overall capacity to handle complex commercial disputes in a more predictable and business-friendly manner.

年中国争议解决观察：制度升级、国际化推进与多元机制扩容）

2025年，中国争议解决领域继续演进。立法层面的修法突破、司法政策层面的系统支持、国际调解机制影响力的上升，以及国际商事法庭机制的完善，共同反映出中国正加快构建一个更加成熟、更加国际化、更加多元化的商事争议解决生态。

仲裁法修订成为2025年的核心制度变化

2025年最重要的制度进展，无疑是新修订《中华人民共和国仲裁法》于2025年9月12日获得通过，并于2026年3月1日起施行。这是中国仲裁法施行三十年来首次全面修订。此次修法旨在完善涉外仲裁制度、提升仲裁公信力，并推进与国际通行规则相衔接的中国特色仲裁实践创新。

此次修法的一项突出亮点，是首次在法律层面正式引入特别仲裁制度，填补了中国仲裁制度中临时仲裁长期缺乏上位法依据的空白，标志着中国临时仲裁实践由地方试点探索迈向全国性法治化规范。根据新修订的《仲裁法》第八十二条，对于涉外海事纠纷，以及在国务院批准的自由贸易试验区、海南自由贸易港等特定区域登记企业之间的涉外纠纷，当事人可以在常设仲裁机构之外，自行选择符合法定条件的人员组成仲裁庭，并依照约定规则进行仲裁。相较于地方试点阶段的临时仲裁规则，特别仲裁制度在制度设计上更加注重兼顾国际通行做法与中国现实需求，采取了渐进式开放的立法路径，即目前仅适用于特定类型、特定区域的涉外纠纷，同时也为未来进一步完善和扩展制度适用范围预留了空间。

此次修法还明显强化了法院对仲裁保全的支持力度，从立法层面进一步完善了仲裁保全的权利体系。其中，第三十九条明确赋予当事人行为保全请求权，允许当事人在仲裁程序中申请法院责令对方实施一定行为或者禁止其实施一定行为。这一规定突破了此前仲裁保全主要集中于财产保全和证据保全的局限，有助于更加及时、有效地保护当事人的合法权益，防止争议标的灭失或者损失进一步扩大。

对于市场主体而言，此次修法的意义并不局限于某一项具体制度创新，而更在于其释放出的整体政策信号：仲裁正在被重新定位为中国涉外法治建设中更加现代化、更加国际兼容、且更受制度支持的核心争议解决机制。从这个意义上说，2025年可被视为中国仲裁迈向下一发展阶段的“立法重置之年”。

审判质效和司法支持持续提升

中国司法体系在审判质效和争议解决支持机制方面亦呈现出持续提升的态势。2026年2月24日，最高人民法院发布《人民法院民商事审判年度报告（2025）》。报告显示，2025年全国法院共受理一审民商事案件679.1万件，同比增长22.0%；审结653.6万件，同比增长18.9%；案件调解、撤诉率为42.33%；一审案件上诉率为2.88%，同比下降19.5%；申诉申请再审率为0.46%，同比下降37%。上述数据充分体现出法院在实质性化解纠纷、定分止争方面取得的显著成效。

根据最高人民法院于2025年12月28日发布的《商事仲裁司法审查年度报告（2024）》，2024年全国法院共审结商事仲裁司法审查案件18,566件；在11,016件撤销仲裁裁决申请中，仅245件被全部或部分撤销，撤销率为2.22%。报告同时披露，2024年全国法院审结42件申请承认和执行外国仲裁裁决案件，且无一件被裁定拒绝承认或执行。

综合来看，上述数据表现表明，中国法院不仅延续了支持仲裁的基本立场，而且正通过更加透明的数据披露、更细化的政策指引以及更克制、更可预期的司法审查方式，不断增强市场对中国争议解决环境的信心。

调解在国际争议解决叙事中的地位明显上升

2025年的另一项显著进展，是调解在中国跨境争议解决格局中的地位明显提升。2025年5月30日，《关于建立国际调解院的公约》签署仪式在中国香港举行。此后，2025年10月20日，国际调解院开业仪式亦在香港举行，标志着这一新设国际组织正式投入运作。国际调解院将与现有国际诉讼及仲裁机制形成互补，为各方和平解决国际争端提供新的制度平台。

这也表明，在传统诉讼和仲裁机制之外，中国正更加积极地推动以调解为代表的非对抗性争议解决方式在国际商事和跨境争议中的制度化发展。上述变化进一步丰富了中国争议解决机制的层次，也增强了其面向国际商事主体的制度吸引力。

区域性争议解决枢纽建设与机构多元化进一步提速

2025年的另一值得关注的趋势，是区域性争议解决枢纽建设持续推进，以及相关制度载体和服务机制进一步多元化。以上海为代表的国际商事中心城市，以及不断扩展的国际商事审判庭和专业化法院网络，正日益成为国家层面制度安排向现实争议解决能力转化的重要承载体。2025年5月14日，上海国际商事法庭首次以调查令形式支持国际商事仲裁调查取证，标志着中国在加强国际仲裁司法支持、营造仲裁友好型法治环境方面迈出了重要一步。

从更宏观的层面看，中国国际商事审判基础设施也在持续扩展。目前中国已在北京、上海、苏州等18个城市设立国际商事审判庭。仅在2025年，这些国际商事审判庭就审结了1,700余件涉外商事及仲裁司法审查案件，涉及50多个国家和地区的当事人，同比增长24%。这一数据表明，中国建设国际商事争端解决优选地的努力，已不再局限于最高人民法院及其国际商事法庭这一顶层平台，而是在更广泛的城市节点和专业化审判网络中逐步落地。

结语

综上，2025年的相关发展表明，中国争议解决体系正朝着更加成熟、更加国际化、也更能回应跨境商业需求的方向持续演进。对于境内外市场主体而言，更值得关注的并非某一项单点改革，而是中国处理复杂商事争议的整体能力正在不断增强，并呈现出更强的可预期性与商业友好度。