The <span class="news-text_italic-underline">Arbitration Law of the People’s Republic of China</span> was originally adopted on 31 August 1994. Although amendments were made in 2009 and 2017, commentators and practitioners had long regarded broader reform as overdue. Over the years, multiple draft proposals created uncertainty around the future direction of arbitration in China, including questions as to whether China would move closer to the <span class="news-text_italic-underline">UNCITRAL Model Law</span>.
On 12 September 2025, China adopted the <span class="news-text_italic-underline">Revised Arbitration Law of the People’s Republic of China (2025 Revision)</span> (“<span class="news-text_medium">Revised Arbitration Law</span>”). The revised law comprises eight chapters and 96 articles and will enter into force on 1 March 2026. It represents the most substantial overhaul of China’s arbitration regime to date and signals a clear intention to modernise and internationalise arbitral practice.
Online arbitration has been used in China for many years. For example, the rules of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission incorporated provisions on online arbitration as early as 2009 and remote hearings are now widely used in practice.
The revised law expressly permits online arbitration unless the parties agree otherwise and confirms that online arbitral activities have the same legal effect as in-person proceedings. This formal recognition reflects established practice and supports efficiency by reducing costs, delays and environmental impact, aligning China’s framework with global trends in digital dispute resolution.
Article 27 introduces an important procedural mechanism. Where a claimant asserts the existence of an arbitration agreement when commencing arbitration, the respondent must deny its existence before the first hearing. Otherwise, the arbitration agreement will be deemed to exist.
This provision is designed to prevent dilatory tactics and facilitate early resolutions of disputes over jurisdiction. Claimants benefit from greater procedural certainty, whilst respondents must clearly articulate any objections to the existence of an arbitration agreement at an early stage.
The revised law confirms the principle of separability, providing that the validity of an arbitration agreement is unaffected by the effectiveness, amendment, invalidity or termination of the underlying contract.
Arbitral tribunals are empowered to rule on the validity of arbitration agreements, with parties retaining the option to seek a ruling from the People’s Court. This party-driven approach is consistent with international practice, although the revised law adopts a more conservative formulation than earlier consultation drafts which would have embraced the principle of ‘kompetenz-kompetenz’ more fully.
For the first time, the revised law allows parties to apply for preservation measures before arbitration is commenced. These include measures to preserve assets, evidence and conduct, bringing arbitration more closely into line with remedies available in Chinese court proceedings.
Emergency relief is available through applications to the People’s Court and arbitral tribunals are empowered to collect evidence directly and to seek assistance from relevant authorities. These provisions enhance the effectiveness of arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism, particularly in urgent or high-risk cases.
Concerns have previously arisen where Chinese courts set aside or refused enforcement of awards due to defects in service. The revised law addresses this by providing that arbitration documents may be served in a reasonable manner agreed by the parties or, failing agreement, in accordance with the applicable arbitral rules.
This ‘fail-safe’ mechanism reduces procedural risk and reflects the fact that arbitral institutions regularly update their service rules to accommodate modern communication technologies.
The revised law reduces the time limit for applying to set aside an arbitral award from six months to three months from receipt of the award. While this change requires parties to act promptly, it promotes finality and certainty in arbitral proceedings and aligns more closely with international norms.
The definition of “foreign-related disputes” has been expanded to include not only traditional categories such as trade, transportation and maritime matters but also “other foreign-related disputes”. This broader formulation increases access to provisions that apply specifically to foreign-related arbitration and enhances flexibility for cross-border disputes.
Parties to foreign-related arbitrations are now expressly permitted to choose the seat of arbitration. The revised law clarifies that the seat determines the procedural law governing the arbitration and the courts with supervisory jurisdiction.
The explicit introduction of the concept of “seat of arbitration” represents a significant step towards harmonisation with international arbitration practice.
The revised law confirms that arbitral awards rendered outside mainland China may be recognised and enforced. Jurisdiction is determined by factors familiar to international practitioners, including the domicile of the award debtor, the location of assets and an appropriate connection to the dispute. Chinese courts are required to act in accordance with applicable international treaties or on the basis of reciprocity.
A further notable reform is the formal recognition of ad hoc arbitration for foreign-related disputes in designated locations. While ad hoc arbitration was previously tested through pilot schemes, it was not formally recognised under the existing regime. This change enhances party autonomy and procedural flexibility and is likely to be welcomed by international users.
The Revised Arbitration Law encourages Chinese arbitral institutions to establish overseas offices and permits foreign arbitral institutions to operate in designated areas within China, such as free trade pilot zones, subject to compliance with state requirements. This signals China’s ambition to deepen integration with the international arbitration community.
The Revised Arbitration Law represents a major milestone in the evolution of China’s arbitral framework. By modernising procedures, strengthening party autonomy and incorporating internationally recognised concepts, the law enhances confidence in arbitration seated in China.
Further judicial interpretations and guidance are expected to follow, as is customary in China and will play a critical role in shaping practical application. The revised law is best viewed as the foundation for continued reform and international engagement in China’s arbitration landscape.
China’s Revised Arbitration Law marks a decisive shift towards internationalisation and modernisation. Parties engaged in cross-border disputes should carefully consider the new framework, as it significantly enhances the appeal of China as a seat of arbitration while introducing procedural changes that will affect arbitration strategy and risk management.
