Article

Factual Summary:

The Plaintiff and Defendant had disputes under a sales contract and the two parties reached mediation agreement whereby the Defendant agreed to compensate in the amount of USD350,000. However, since the Defendant did not perform as per the mediation agreement, the Plaintiff filed charges against the Defendant from Singapore Supreme Court according to the governing jurisdiction terms in the mediation agreement.

When summoned, the Defendant did not appear before the court. Singapore Supreme Court entered into judgment2by default for the Plaintiff and ordered the Defendant to compensate USD350,000 plus interests Singapore dollar 4137.9 at 5.33% p.a. calculated from the date of summon order to the date of judgment.

The Plaintiff also delivered the order to the Defendant but was disregarded. As both the Defendant’s office and property are located within China, when finding out that the Defendant did not act according to the court’s judgment, the Plaintiff applied from Nanjing Intermediary People’s Court for its recognition and enforcement of Singapore Supreme Court’s judgment.

Nanjing Intermediary People’s Court entered judgment for the Plaintiff.

1
Jun Xu, Deputy General Manager, Bank of China, Jiangsu Branch, China; Member of ICC Banking Commission’s Executive Committee

2
Singapore Supreme Court [2014]SGHC16

Legal Analysis:

1. Foreign judgments recognition and enforcement

Nanjing Intermediary People’s Court considers that, according to Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, “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 examining it in accordance with the international treaty concluded or acceded to be 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 writ of order, and if required, issue a writ of execution to enforce it in accordance with the relevant provisions of this Law. If the application or request contradicts, the basic principles of the law of the People’s Republic of China or violates the state sovereignty, security and social and public interest of the country, the people’s court shall not recognize or enforce it”, the case was trialed by Singapore Supreme Court, and China has not entered into treaty or acceded to the international treaty on mutual recognition and enforcement of effective judgment, however, since Singapore Supreme Court enforced the civil judgment of its municipal city Su Zhou Intermediary People’s Court within Jiangsu Province in January 2014, based on reciprocal principle, the court shall recognize and enforce the decision of Singapore Supreme Court which meets the conditions of the law.

The court finds that the judgment of the case is not in violation of the basic principles of PRC laws nor the state sovereignty, security and social common interests, and ruled in favor of the Plaintiff.

Comments by Jun XU:

1. Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments

It is the first time that PRC court recognizes and enforces Singapore civil judgments, and it is also the first time that such judgment is made according to reciprocal relationship[Emphasis added]. The judgment is not only a milestone in the foreign judgments recognition between China and Singapore, but also may become a push in the foreign judgments recognition and enforcement cooperation process for countries having reciprocal relationship with P.R.China.

China has been quite cautious in recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments, just as the other countries do in the same aspects. For a long time, China courts only have very limited recognition and enforcement of foreign judgment (the identity relationship in divorce case).

In March 2014, Ning Bo People’s Court in Zhejiang province recognized and enforced Poland court’s judgments according to the bilateral treaty signed between the two countries ([2013]Zhe Yong Que No.1).

According to Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, following conditions must be met for foreign judgments to be recognized and enforced in China: 1. The country where the foreign court locates has concluded bilateral legal reciprocal treaty, or acceded to the court judgment recognition multilateral treaty with P.R.China, or has reciprocal relationship in recognizing and enforcing the court judgments of each country (excepted for divorce case); 2. The foreign judgment is legally effective; 3. The foreign judgment does not contradict the basic principles of the law of the People’s Republic of China or violates the state sovereignty, security and social and public interest of the country.

2. Singapore Supreme Court’s recognition and enforcement of PRC judgment

It is worth mentioning the case in which Singapore Supreme Court recognized PRC judgment, as mentioned by Nanjing Intermediary Court.

It is the Giant Light Metal Technology (Kunshan) Co Ltd v Aksa Far East Pte Ltd[2014] SGHC 16(Singapore)case.

On 16 December 2010, Giant Light Metal Technology (Kunshan) Co Ltd (“the Plaintiff”) , a company incorporated in the People’s Republic of China (“the PRC”) , obtained judgment against Aksa Far East Pte Ltd (“the Defendant”), a company incorporated in Singapore ,in the PRC Court for breach of contract (“the PRC Judgment”). The Plaintiff then sought to enforce against the Defendant in Singapore the PRC Judgment for the payment of various sums of moneys.

The Judge concluded: “I held that the Defendant’s obligation to pay the PRC Judgment Sums was enforceable in Singapore. To be clear, in arriving at this conclusion, I did not have to consider nor place any reliance on the validity or otherwise of the underlying claim in contract sued upon in the PRC Judgment”.

The judge entered judgment for the Plaintiff, and ordered the Defendant to pay the Plaintiff the PRC Judgment sums, fees, interest, costs and etc. as ordered in the PRC Judgment.

COPYRIGHT OF THE INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL BANKING LAW & PRACTICE

The views expressed in this Case Summary are those of the Institute of International Banking Law and Practice and not necessarily those of the ICC or Coastline Solutions.