This article reviews nineteen cases concerning the setting aside of foreign–related arbitral awards in China. Apart from presenting statistical information, the author focuses on how the courts interpret regulations in cases. The main finding is that the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) tends to apply the regulations with a pro–arbitration attitude, which can be supported by its restrictive interpretation of prescribed grounds, preference for remission and broad use of setting aside awards only partially. In addition, the study also reveals a series of practical problems caused by an inconsistent arbitration legal system. The author recommends that the Arbitration Law (AL) of China should not only prescribe the grounds for setting aside foreign-related awards directly but also clearly specify the definition of foreign–related arbitral award.
Journal of International Arbitration