Interim Remedies in the People’s Republic of China

Abstract

Despite an absence of a specific definition of interim remedy, the law of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) provides for measures similar to interim remedies under English law through a wide range of legislation. This Chapter offers an introduction to the interim measures under PRC law and their respective challenges in practice. Currently, a major problem with the interim measures under PRC law is that the legislation does not provide clear enough guidance on the conditions for granting interim measures. This gives courts significant discretion in deciding whether or not and under what circumstances the application for interim measures should be granted. This results in practices that put the respondents in a relatively disadvantageous position. On the one hand, it is relatively easy for applicants to secure interim measures as long as guarantees are provided; on the other hand, the law does not provide respondents with sufficient remedies for interim measures that are taken wrongfully. In terms of the interim measures’ relation to arbitration, PRC law does not empower arbitral tribunals to take interim measures. Any application for interim measures in the process of arbitration must be directed to and reviewed by the PRC court, whereas the court is not necessarily best suited to deciding it. In terms of enforcement of interim measures, a foreign interim measure order, rendered by either a foreign court or a foreign arbitral tribunal, is generally not enforceable in the PRC.