CHINA Law and Practice Contributed by: Paul Zhou and Leslie Shen, SGLA Law Firm
6.3 Security for Costs The arbitral tribunal may require a party applying for interim measures to provide security. The amount and form of security (cash deposit, bank guarantee, or other form acceptable to the tribunal) are deter - mined by the tribunal in its discretion. If the applicant fails to provide the required security within the pre - scribed time limit, the application may be rejected. This requirement is designed to prevent abusive or speculative applications for interim measures and to provide the respondent with a remedy in the event that the interim measure causes loss. Institutional rules (for example, Article 23 (3) of the CIETAC Rules 2024) codify the security requirement for tribunal-ordered interim measures. Judicial statistics for 2025 indicate that Chinese courts handled approximately 28,000 applications for property preservation in support of arbitration, with an approval rate of 82.3%. The average processing time from the institution’s transmission of the application to the court’s order was 4.8 days for applications sub - mitted through the arbitration institution, and 2.3 days for urgent ex parte applications submitted directly to the court prior to the commencement of arbitration. These statistics reflect the high level of court sup - port for arbitration-related interim measures in China, which compares favourably with the experience in many other jurisdictions. Arbitral proceedings are governed by: (i) the arbitration agreement; (ii) the arbitration rules of the administering institution; and (iii) the Arbitration Law. The principle of party autonomy is paramount, subject to the manda - tory provisions of the law. The 2025 Arbitration Law reaffirms the principle of party autonomy while intro - ducing default procedural rules for matters not agreed by the parties. The institution’s rules have the force of contract as between the parties and the institution, and the tribunal is bound to apply the agreed rules unless the parties agree to disapply or modify them, subject to mandatory legal provisions. 7. Procedure 7.1 Governing Rules
7.2 Procedural Steps A typical institutional arbitration in China proceeds through the following procedural steps: (i) the claim - ant files a notice of arbitration (or request for arbi - tration) with the selected arbitral institution; (ii) the institution reviews the request for compliance with formal requirements and, if satisfied, registers the case and notifies the parties; (iii) the respondent files a response (submission of defence), which is optional in most institutional rules; (iv) the parties appoint arbi - trators in accordance with the agreement or the insti - tutional rules; (v) the parties exchange written plead - ings (statement of claim and statement of defence); (vi) the parties exchange evidential submissions; (vii) an oral hearing is convened (or, if the parties agree or the tribunal determines, the proceedings are con - ducted on a documents-only basis); (viii) the parties may submit post-hearing briefs (optional, depending on the rules and the tribunal’s directions); (ix) the tribu - nal deliberates in private; and (x) the tribunal renders the arbitral award. Institutional rules provide expedited procedures for small-value claims: for example, under the CIETAC Rules 2024, claims where the amount in dispute does not exceed CNY5 million are handled under the expedited procedure, with simplified steps and a shortened timeline (the award must be rendered within three months of the tribunal’s constitution). 7.3 Powers and Duties of Arbitrators Arbitrators have the power and duty to: (i) conduct the proceedings fairly, efficiently, and in accordance with the law and the parties’ agreement; (ii) ensure the equal treatment of the parties and afford each party a reasonable opportunity to present its case and to respond to the other party’s case; (iii) determine the admissibility, relevance, materiality and weight of evi - dence; (iv) rule on jurisdictional objections pursuant to the competence-competence doctrine under Article 31 of the 2025 Arbitration Law; and (v) render the arbi - tral award within the timeframe prescribed by law or the institutional rules. The 2025 Arbitration Law codi - fies these powers, while the time limit for rendering the award is prescribed by institutional rules (for example, six months from the tribunal’s constitution under the CIETAC Rules 2024). Arbitrators must also disclose conflicts of interest, maintain the confidentiality of the arbitration, and
246 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook