Arbitration and Law - Issue 102

Author:
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2006-08-01
Features: "Arbitration and Law" is a national legal journal sponsored by the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), the China Maritime Arbitration Commission (CMA), and the Arbitration Research Institute of the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade (CCPIT). Since its inception, "Arbitration and Law" has promptly reported on the development trends and information of arbitration both domestically and internationally, and has published a large number of enlightening and instructive academic papers, case analyses, as well as articles introducing advanced international arbitration concepts, experiences, and related laws, regulations, and arbitration rules. It is an authoritative journal for the study of arbitration theory and practice in China. "Arbitration and Law" currently features the following columns: Arbitration Dynamics, Special Articles and Debates, Mediation Column, Haihen Arbitration, Exquisite Cases, Special Features, Laws and Regulations, etc. Since 2002, "Arbitration and Law" has been published bimonthly by the Legal Press, with domestic and international distribution. There are a total of 6 issues per year, with a total price of RMB 72, and each issue is priced at RMB 12. We welcome arbitration institutions, arbitrators, lawyers, and all individuals interested in arbitration theory and practice to subscribe and contribute.
China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission 2005 Work Report
I. Case Acceptance and Adjudication in 2005
(1) Economic and Trade Arbitration Case Handling
In 2005, the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (hereinafter referred to as CIETAC) set a historical high record in the number of arbitration cases accepted, totaling 979 cases (427 foreign-related cases and 552 domestic cases). Among them, the Beijing headquarters accepted 462 cases, the Shanghai branch accepted 304 cases, and the South China branch accepted 213 cases. Compared to the 850 cases accepted in 2004, there was an increase of 129 cases, with a growth rate of 15.2%. The total amount of disputes involved was RMB 12.06 billion. Eight cases handled by the Beijing headquarters involved dispute amounts exceeding RMB 100 million.
In 2005, CIETAC concluded a total of 958 cases, including 448 cases at the Beijing headquarters, 301 cases at the Shanghai branch, and 209 cases at the South China branch. For the first time in 2005, the number of domestic arbitration cases accepted by CIETAC exceeded that of foreign-related cases. However, a significant proportion of domestic arbitration cases had certain foreign elements. For example, the Shanghai branch accepted 181 domestic cases involving foreign-invested enterprises as one party, accounting for 86.2% of the total domestic cases handled by the Shanghai branch.
In terms of the types of disputes involved in the cases accepted, the disputes handled by CIETAC in the three locations became more diversified, including: commodity sales, investment, technology contracts, finance, real estate, guarantees, engineering contracts, processing and subcontracting, leasing, transportation, franchising, advertising, intellectual property, and other types of disputes. Among them, commodity sales contract disputes still ranked first in terms of case volume, and lease contract disputes also accounted for a considerable number in domestic cases. At the same time, new types of disputes increased, such as cooperative education, entrusted investment management, franchising, and sponsorship.
From the perspective of case nature, the proportion of foreign-related cases in the total number of accepted cases continued to decline, while the number of domestic cases accepted exceeded that of foreign-related cases for the first time. The number of cases handled under the (simple procedure) increased, the number of cases where parties agreed to arbitration procedures also increased, and the number of cases applying the financial dispute arbitration rules also increased.
From the perspective of case complexity, in addition to the need to carefully handle and ensure the quality of various procedural matters throughout the case handling process, the number of jurisdictional objections and requests for arbitrator recusal submitted by parties continued to grow. Many cases involved more complex procedural and legal issues than in the past, and the proportion of cases where handling personnel and arbitral tribunals collaborated to propose opinions and submitted them to the Expert Advisory Committee for discussion increased.
In 2005, CIETAC held a meeting with experts---