China’s newly enacted Arbitration Law strengthens the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region’s status as a preferred venue for international arbitration and deepens the synergy and collaboration between Hong Kong and the rest of the country in the field of arbitration. Hong Kong supports such development by continuously contributing to the nation’s foreign-related talent development.
On March 1, China’s new Arbitration Law came into force. The new Arbitration Law introduces notable provisions supporting the cross-border development of arbitral institutions. It encourages mainland arbitral institutions to establish overseas offices — a significant step in advancing the internationalization of Chinese arbitration — while permitting non-Chinese-mainland arbitral institutions, including those from Hong Kong, to operate within the mainland’s pilot free trade zones and the Hainan Free Trade Port. This dual-track approach of “going global” and “bringing in” creates a natural bridge for arbitration cooperation and signals the country’s determination to align the mainland framework with international best practices.
As the mainland arbitration system further aligns with international practices, Hong Kong’s role as a superconnector between the mainland and international legal markets becomes more solidified. The complementarity between Hong Kong’s mature common law arbitration system and the mainland’s evolving arbitration rules will attract more international investors to choose Hong Kong as the seat of arbitration to resolve disputes involving the mainland. With its common law heritage, pro-arbitration Judiciary, and deep pool of international talent, Hong Kong is uniquely positioned to contribute to this shared journey.
Hong Kong’s role as the nation’s premier international legal hub remains distinct and vital. The latest statistics from the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre for 2025 paint a picture of a jurisdiction firing on all cylinders. With 388 arbitrations filed and a total disputed amount exceeding HK$126.2 billion ($16.11 billion), the numbers speak to immense user confidence. Strikingly, 84.3 percent of cases were international, involving parties from 61 jurisdictions. In 96.6 percent of cases, Hong Kong was chosen as the arbitral seat, and Hong Kong law was the most frequently selected governing law.
These statistics reflect strong user confidence and highlight the city’s reputation for judicial certainty and reliability. Hong Kong’s Judiciary has built a reputation for being firmly supportive of arbitration. The courts consistently respect the parties’ choice to arbitrate and give effect to arbitral awards.
One recent case illustrates this proarbitration stance. In G, G v CNG and SI [2026] HKCFI 902, the Court of First Instance reaffirmed the finality of arbitral awards, rejecting attempts to reopen proceedings under the guise of newly alleged fraud. The judgment confirmed that the three-month window to challenge an award under the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law’s Model Law is a strict, jurisdictional time bar, not a gate that can be reopened for equity or fairness.
The courts also take a firm stance against procedural abuses that undermine arbitration agreements. In A v B [2025] HKCFI 6367, the Court of First Instance held that where a party commences litigation in breach of an arbitration agreement or mounts a hopeless challenge to its validity, the innocent party is entitled not only to a stay of proceedings but also to costs on the indemnity basis — a more generous measure than the usual party-to-party basis. The decision underscores that the court will enforce arbitration agreements with meaningful costs sanctions, even where the clause imposes stringent preconditions.
This proarbitration stance, however, does not mean the courts will enforce awards at any cost. In Song Lihua v Lee Chee Hon [2023] HKCFI 2540, the court refused to enforce a mainland award of 337 million yuan ($49.35 million) after reviewing video footage showing an arbitrator repeatedly looking away from the screen, speaking to others, and at times offline — even failing to respond when asked if he could still hear. The court held that such lack of focus during a virtual hearing violated due process and undermined the integrity of the proceedings. It is precisely this principled and predictable approach — supportive of arbitration yet unwavering in its commitment to fundamental fairness — that makes Hong Kong a preferred venue for international dispute resolution.
Through cross-border cooperation, we advance not only Hong Kong’s standing as Asia’s premier dispute resolution hub but also China’s vision for a robust and credible foreign-related rule-of-law framework
Mainland practitioners possess an intimate understanding of domestic-market dynamics, a keen insight into capital flows, and a clear appreciation of the needs driving public and private sector clients. They command local networks and on-the-ground intelligence that are indispensable for any foreign-related transaction or dispute. To embrace the opportunities brought by the new Arbitration Law and to assist mainland enterprises to better solve their disputes through international arbitration, it is vital for mainland practitioners to equip themselves with knowledge of common law and procedures and requirements of international arbitration.
This recognition has spurred ground-level collaboration in legal education between Hong Kong and the mainland. The Hong Kong Bar Association (HKBA) has been actively nurturing mainland legal talent, and its recent initiative in Zhejiang province is a prime example. In March 2025, the HKBA co-organized with the Zhejiang Department of Justice and the Zhejiang Lawyers Association to launch a training program for foreign-related lawyers.
The 10-month program, taught primarily in English, is rigorous and selective. Thirty Zhejiang province-based lawyers, chosen through competitive exams, are delving into subjects like international arbitration, contract law, cross-border insolvency, and advocacy. The curriculum masterfully blends lectures with interactive workshops, and crucially, it includes a planned visit to Hong Kong for exchange. This allows them to experience firsthand the operation of the common law system under “one country, two systems” framework, effectively bridging theory and practice.
The mock arbitration, a highlight of this exchange, was conducted entirely in English. The HKBA sent three senior counsel/barristers to form the arbitral tribunal. After completing the mock arbitration, the trainees expressed that the experience was unforgettable. Through in-depth study of the case, repeated discussions of directions of examining witnesses, direct confrontation with witnesses during the mock, and answering difficult questions from the arbitral tribunal, their hands-on participation in each step enhanced their understanding of the procedures and requirements of international arbitration.
Having the privilege to observe and coach in this program, one sees firsthand the remarkable and distinct strengths that mainland lawyers bring to the international arbitration table.
Looking ahead, opportunities deepen. With the International Organization for Mediation headquarters established in Hong Kong, and the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area integration accelerating, synergies between mainland expertise and Hong Kong’s international connectivity will intensify. Through cross-border cooperation, we advance not only Hong Kong’s standing as Asia’s premier dispute resolution hub but also China’s vision for a robust and credible foreign-related rule-of-law framework.
The author, a barrister and an arbitrator, is a co-secretary of the Hong Kong Bar Association’s standing committee on mainland affairs. She is qualified as a Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area lawyer.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
