CHINA Law and Practice Contributed by: Paul Zhou and Leslie Shen, SGLA Law Firm
nal in accordance with its rules. Under the CIETAC Arbitration Rules (2024 Revision), for a three-arbitrator tribunal, each party appoints one co-arbitrator, and the two co-arbitrators jointly appoint the chairperson. If a party fails to make an appointment within the pre - scribed time limit (15 days of receiving the notice of arbitration), the institution makes the appointment on its behalf. If the two co-arbitrators fail to agree on the chairperson within the prescribed time limit, the insti - tution appoints the chairperson. The 2025 Arbitration Law codifies these default procedures and provides that institutional rules supplement the provisions of the law. 4.3 Court Intervention Court intervention in the composition of the arbitral tri - bunal is strictly limited under the 2025 Arbitration Law. The court may intervene only to: (i) decide on chal - lenges to arbitrators if the institution fails to decide within the prescribed timeframe; (ii) provide eviden - tiary assistance pursuant to Article 55; and (iii) set aside or enforce awards. The court is not permitted to interfere with the tribunal’s composition during the arbitration proceedings unless there is a clear violation of the law or the arbitration agreement that cannot be remedied through the institutional challenge mecha - nism. This limitation reflects the 2025 Amendment’s legislative policy of respecting party autonomy and minimising unnecessary judicial interference in the arbitral process. 4.4 Challenge and Removal of Arbitrators A party may challenge an arbitrator on the following grounds: (i) lack of impartiality or independence; (ii) existence of a disqualifying conflict of interest; (iii) failure to disclose circumstances that give rise to jus - tifiable doubts as to impartiality or independence; or (iv) inability to perform arbitral duties due to illness, withdrawal or other reasons. The challenge must be raised before the first oral hearing or, for document- only proceedings, before the exchange of the first substantive submission after the constitution of the tribunal. The challenge must be brought within 15 days of the party becoming aware of the grounds. The institution decides on the challenge. If the challenge is denied, the party may seek court review in foreign- related arbitration pursuant to SPC judicial interpreta - tion. The 2025 Arbitration Law strengthened the dis -
closure requirements: arbitrators must disclose any circumstances that may give rise to justifiable doubts as to their impartiality or independence, and the duty of disclosure is ongoing throughout the proceedings. An arbitrator may be removed by agreement of all par - ties, or by the institution if the challenge is upheld. The 2025 Arbitration Law also provides for automatic removal if the arbitrator fails to disclose a conflict of interest that subsequently comes to light and affects impartiality. Failure to make required disclosures may also constitute a ground for setting aside the award under Article 71 (3) (composition of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral proceedings violated statutory proce - dures). 4.5 Arbitrator Requirements Arbitrators must satisfy the following requirements: (i) full legal capacity; (ii) impartiality and independence from the parties and the dispute; (iii) relevant exper - tise, which may be legal, technical or industry-specific depending on the nature of the dispute; and (iv) no unpardoned criminal conviction (or such other dis - qualification as provided by law). For foreign-related arbitration, arbitrators with expertise in international law, foreign languages and cross-border commercial practice are preferred. The 2025 Arbitration Law per - mits foreign nationals to serve as arbitrators in foreign- related disputes, subject to the principle of reciprocity and the rules of the administering institution. Major institutions maintain panels of arbitrators, but the parties are free to select arbitrators from outside the panel with the agreement of all parties, pursuant to the expanded party autonomy under the 2025 Amend - ment. The internationalisation of arbitrator rosters has pro - gressed significantly since 2023. As of March 2026, CIETAC’s roster included 346 arbitrators from 89 for - eign jurisdictions, representing 18.3% of the total ros - ter. BAC/BIAC’s roster included 197 foreign arbitrators (19.2% of the total). SHIAC and SCIA have similarly expanded their international rosters. Notably, the 2025 Amendment’s provision permitting foreign nationals to serve as arbitrators has facilitated the appointment of practitioners from civil-law jurisdictions (eg, France, Germany, Japan) who were previously ineligible due to the “senior professional title” requirement, which has
243 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook