Enforcement of English judgments and orders in China: expert opinion on the current position, reciprocity developments and practical routes

The judgment creditor held a substantial English money judgment, but the debtor’s realisable assets — real estate, shareholdings, bank deposits — were in mainland China. The English proceedings required expert evidence on whether the judgment could be recognised and enforced in China, on realistic timescales and prospects, and on alternative routes.

Reporting under CPR Part 35, we addressed: (1) the evolution of reciprocity in the Chinese courts in the absence of a UK–PRC treaty — from strict factual reciprocity towards presumed or de jure reciprocity; (2) the Shanghai Maritime Court’s recognition of an English commercial judgment and its aftermath; (3) the amended Civil Procedure Law in force from 1 January 2024, including jurisdiction, review standards and the codified grounds for refusing recognition of foreign judgments; (4) the mechanics — competent court, documentary requirements (apostilled judgment, certified translation), time limits and asset preservation; and (5) an assessment of routes that do not depend on judgment recognition.

The opinion concluded that, on the reciprocity practice of recent years and the criteria settled by the Supreme People’s Court conference minutes, recognition of an English money judgment in China is now a realistic prospect — while stressing that outcomes turn on case-specific review points such as validity of service and conformity with Chinese public policy, each of which the report risk-assessed against the facts.

It added operational guidance: apply for asset preservation at the outset of the recognition application to forestall dissipation; obtain an apostille for the judgment and compliant certified translations; and it compared the fallback of fresh proceedings in China on the underlying claim, with the advantages and costs of each route.

The client proceeded on the recommended twin track of recognition plus preservation. For creditors holding English judgments against China-based assets, the framework mapped in the opinion — no treaty, evolving reciprocity, the 2024 amendments, and the practical mechanics — is precisely the terrain English practitioners now need charted.