Conflict of Laws in the People’s Republic of China
Show Less

Conflict of Laws in the People’s Republic of China

Zheng Sophia Tang, Yongping Xiao and Zhengxin Huo

The area of conflict of laws in China has undergone fundamental development in the past three decades and the most recent changes in the 2010s, regarding both jurisdiction and choice of law rules, mark the establishment of modern Chinese conflicts system. Jointly written by three professors from both China and the UK, this book provides the most up-to-date and comprehensive analysis of Chinese conflict of laws in civil and commercial matters. It takes into account the latest developments in legislation and judicial interpretation, case law and judicial practice, and historical, political and economic background, especially recognizing the scholarly contribution made by Chinese scholars to this field.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content


Zheng Sophia Tang, Yongping Xiao and Zhengxin Huo


Although this book focuses on private international law questions, it cannot avoid some important procedural issues in foreign-related actions. These issues are closely connected to foreign-related actions and the implementation of private international law. Even if a Chinese court has jurisdiction and is willing to exert jurisdiction to hear a dispute, the proceedings cannot be commenced, nor can the purpose of the proceedings be achieved, if the defendant cannot be served, if the court cannot take evidence abroad, if the foreign claimant is required to provide security for cost and cannot pay, if one of the parties needs judicial aid but cannot acquire it, if the defendant continues the alleged wrong or infringement, or if the defendant hides or removes assets out of the jurisdiction. This chapter discusses these important procedural matters in foreign-related litigation in the Chinese courts. After the claimant commences legal proceedings in China, the Chinese court should serve process on the defendant. Service of process is an exercise of judicial sovereignty. As a result, Chinese law provides restrictive rules on extraterritorial service, focusing on the protection of national and judicial sovereignty instead of pragmatic convenience and efficiency. If the defendant has no domicile in China, the court could serve the claim form through any means approved in Article 267 of the CPL. Article 267 provides eight authorized ways to serve judicial documents on defendants with no domicile in China.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.