Frequently asked questions

Usually not. Once a PRC-licensed lawyer is properly authorized, the lawyer can generally handle the litigation process on your behalf. In some identity-related matters, such as divorce, personal appearance may be required. The court may also require you to participate for testimony, identity verification, settlement, or another procedural step. If personal participation is needed, we will tell you before the hearing or procedural deadline. Remote participation is possible only when the court accepts that format.

There is no reliable one-size-fits-all timeline. China generally uses a two-instance system for civil cases: if a party appeals the first-instance judgment, the dispute may proceed to a second-instance case and the second-instance judgment is generally final. If no one appeals, the case may end after the first instance. Before the court accepts or substantively hears a case, jurisdiction objections may also consume time. Service, evidence exchange, expert appraisal, recognition or authentication of overseas documents, appeals, and enforcement can all extend the process. In our experience, an ordinary trial process is often around one year, but the actual timeline must be assessed case by case.

Often yes. For many civil claims, the general limitation period is three years from when the claimant knows or should know of the right and the person who must perform the obligation. Special rules, suspension, interruption, acknowledgment of debt, and the nature of the claim may change the analysis. If a limitation issue already exists, counsel can review the record and help improve the evidence where there is a legal basis to argue suspension, interruption, acknowledgment, or recalculation. Early advice is important because filing and evidence deadlines can be decisive.

Foreign parties enjoy the litigation rights provided by Chinese law on an equal basis with Chinese parties. Equal litigation rights do not mean priority, special treatment, or a guaranteed favorable result. Whether a case is handled fairly in practical terms depends on jurisdiction, admissible evidence, applicable law, procedural compliance, and the court's assessment of the facts.

The answer depends on the contract, the parties' choice of law, mandatory rules, the dispute's connection with China, and any applicable treaty. A choice-of-law clause is important but may not control every issue. Questions involving China-based assets, regulated activities, public policy, or enforcement may require separate analysis under PRC law.

If you need legal representation before a PRC court, you generally need a lawyer licensed to practice in mainland China. Foreign counsel may advise on foreign law or cross-border strategy, but should not be described as PRC court counsel unless properly qualified and authorized for that role.

Civil hearings are generally public unless a statutory exception applies. A party may ask the court to hold all or part of a hearing in private when, for example, commercial secrets or personal privacy are involved. The request is subject to the court's review and is not automatic.

The requirement depends on the document, the country where it was issued, the purpose for which it will be used, and the forum. Powers of attorney and corporate identity documents commonly require a prescribed authentication process. For documents from a country participating in the Apostille Convention, an Apostille may replace consular legalization; for other countries, a different legalization or treaty procedure may apply. Not every item of evidence automatically requires notarization.

Documents submitted to a PRC court generally need a Chinese translation. The court may have specific expectations about the form and quality of the translation, and it may ask for the original or additional proof of authenticity. We can help organize a bilingual evidence package and identify which documents require formal translation or authentication.

Start by preserving the evidence before it changes: contracts, purchase orders, invoices, payment records, shipping and warehouse records, inspection reports, photographs, videos, product samples, and communications. Depending on the dispute, electronic evidence, notarization, an independent inspection, or expert appraisal may strengthen the case. The right method depends on what must be proved and what evidence remains available.

PRC court proceedings and judgments are generally conducted or issued in Chinese. A party who does not understand Chinese may need an interpreter, and the court may require filings and evidence to be accompanied by Chinese translations. We can provide English explanations or translations as agreed in the engagement, but the court does not necessarily provide a complete English version of every document.

The best forum depends on the jurisdiction clause, the defendant's location, where the evidence and assets are located, limitation periods, likely remedies, and whether the resulting decision can be enforced. A foreign judgment may require a separate recognition and enforcement application in China, while a PRC judgment may raise enforcement questions abroad. Forum selection should be assessed before filing.

Arbitration is usually available only when the parties have a valid arbitration agreement covering the dispute. The institution, seat, language, governing law, interim relief, confidentiality, cost, and enforcement prospects all matter. Awards made in another New York Convention jurisdiction may be eligible for recognition and enforcement in China, subject to the applicable law and any refusal grounds.

If the arbitration agreement is valid, covers the dispute, and the dispute is arbitrable, a PRC court will generally not hear the merits of the dispute. The result may be different if the clause is invalid, does not cover the claim, or the dispute falls outside the scope of arbitration. Courts may still be involved in certain matters, such as evidence or asset preservation, where the law permits.

Yes, a defendant may bring a counterclaim if the procedural requirements are met and the claim is sufficiently connected with the case. Counterclaim risk should be assessed before filing, including the contract language, evidence, limitation periods, jurisdiction, and any potential exposure for costs or damages.

Yes. Negotiation and court-led mediation may occur before or during litigation, and an enforcement settlement may also be possible after judgment. A settlement should be documented carefully, with clear payment dates, default consequences, releases, governing law, and an enforceable mechanism where appropriate. Saving time is valuable, but the settlement amount and collectability must be compared with the litigation outcome that is realistically available.

There are several separate cost categories: court case acceptance fees, lawyer fees, translation, notarization or authentication, preservation security, expert appraisal, travel, and enforcement expenses. Court fees should be discussed by reference to the applicable Measures for Payment of Litigation Fees. In general, case acceptance fees are ultimately borne by the losing party or allocated by the court; if you win, you may apply for the court to refund the prepaid court fee to your account according to the judgment and local procedure. Lawyer fees depend on the claim amount, complexity, workload, fee arrangement, and engagement terms. Other expenses should also be identified separately. This is not a quote for total case costs.

A success-based arrangement may be restricted or unavailable depending on the type of matter, the strength of the case, and applicable professional rules. In China, success-based lawyer fees may be structured as a full contingency or a partial contingency arrangement, but this relates to lawyer fees only. It does not include court fees, appraisal fees, translation fees, notarization or authentication fees, preservation security, or other third-party costs. Whether we can accept a contingency arrangement depends on a case assessment; if the legal or collection risk is high, counsel may decline that structure. You may send us the materials for review, and we can confirm whether a permitted success-based structure is available.

This is an important difference from the United States. In China, lawyer fees are usually not treated as a necessary and reasonable enforcement or rights-protection expense that automatically shifts to the losing party. Each party generally bears its own lawyer fees unless the contract, law, or applicable judicial rule provides a basis for recovery. If your contract expressly requires the other side to bear lawyer fees, we can include that claim and support it with the fee agreement, invoices, and payment evidence, but the court may still review the necessity and reasonableness of the amount.

Potentially recoverable items depend on the claim and legal basis. Court fees are commonly addressed in the judgment; preservation, appraisal, translation, notarization, and lawyer fees may be recoverable only where the law, contract, or case-specific ruling supports them. We separate recoverable items from business expenses when preparing a damages and costs claim.

Payment arrangements are discussed with counsel and stated in the engagement letter. Depending on the facts, claim amount, workload, and risk profile, fees may be charged as a fixed fee, staged fee, hourly fee, retainer, or, where permitted, a success-based arrangement under which part or all of the lawyer fee is paid after a successful outcome. Disbursements and third-party costs should be identified separately so that the client knows what is included and what is not.

A foreign judgment is not automatically enforceable in China. The applicant generally must apply to a competent PRC court for recognition and, where appropriate, enforcement. The court will examine issues such as an applicable treaty or reciprocity, jurisdiction, service and due process, finality, public policy, and conflicting judgments. A case-specific assessment is essential; do not assume that a judgment will be accepted or rejected without reviewing the country and the record.

You may be able to apply for pre-litigation or in-litigation property preservation. Pre-litigation preservation is subject to stricter conditions and may not fit every case. In-litigation preservation is often more practical, but the court will still review the application and may require security. You normally need to provide asset clues for the property to be preserved. At the preservation stage, the court usually does not conduct a full asset search on its own initiative. If you need preservation but do not have asset clues, we can discuss a separate asset-search service and fee arrangement.

In China, private investigators are not a standard legal mechanism for enforcing judgments. The authority responsible for enforcing a judgment or arbitral award is the people's court. The court may use national enforcement inquiry and control systems to search for and control bank accounts and other assets of the judgment debtor. These systems are useful but not always complete, so enforcement may still depend on asset clues provided by the creditor and further lawful offline investigation or searches.

Cross-border remittance depends on the recipient, the account structure, supporting court or settlement documents, tax and banking requirements, currency-control rules, and the bank's review. Individual foreign-exchange purchase quotas should not be treated as a universal cap on every corporate or judgment-related remittance. We can help identify the documents and approvals that may be needed, but timing and approval cannot be guaranteed.

China generally uses a two-instance system for civil cases. An appeal can delay finality and may require additional briefing, evidence analysis, and hearings. The statutory review period for a second-instance case is not a promise of actual completion time; extensions and case-specific circumstances may apply. Enforcement strategy should be revisited once the appeal and judgment status are clear.

A party may generally appeal a first-instance judgment to the higher court within the applicable statutory period. The usual period is 15 days from service of a judgment and 10 days from service of a ruling, but foreign-related service rules, the type of decision, and other procedural rules may affect the calculation. A second-instance judgment is generally final, while a retrial application may be available only on limited statutory grounds. Deadlines should be checked immediately.

A company is generally a separate legal person, so a shareholder is not automatically liable for company debts. Personal liability may be possible in specific situations established by law and evidence, such as unpaid capital obligations, abuse of the corporate form, commingling, or other statutory grounds. The correct route may be an enforcement application, a claim against the responsible person, or another proceeding.

If the company is in bankruptcy, a creditor may need to file a claim within the bankruptcy process and participate in the creditors' procedures. Deregistration does not automatically eliminate every possible claim, but the relevant strategy depends on how the company was dissolved, whether liquidation occurred, and what the shareholders or liquidation obligors did. Status checks should be done before choosing a defendant or remedy.

After an effective enforceable document is not performed, a court may impose enforcement credit measures when the statutory conditions and procedures are met. A restriction on high consumption limits certain spending by the judgment debtor, such as certain travel, hotel, property, schooling, and other high-consumption activities. Inclusion on the judgment-defaulter list is a more serious credit measure generally directed at a debtor who has the ability to perform but refuses to do so, hides or transfers property, or otherwise evades enforcement. These measures are not automatic and should not be described as guaranteed pressure tactics.

A contract breach is not automatically a criminal fraud case. A report may be appropriate when the facts support a possible crime, but the distinction depends on evidence of intent, representations, conduct at the time of contracting, loss, and other legal elements. A criminal complaint should not be used merely as a collection tactic. The police and prosecutorial authorities decide whether to investigate or file a case.

At the start of an engagement, we should agree on the main contact, communication channels, reporting cadence, and what counts as a material development. Key events such as filing, service, hearings, mediation, judgment, appeal, and enforcement action should be explained in a way that makes the next decision clear. Update frequency depends on the engagement and the pace of the case.

No. Under the professional obligations applicable to Chinese lawyers, a lawyer should not promise or guarantee any case result. Every dispute involves litigation risk, including evidence risk, legal interpretation risk, procedural risk, enforcement risk, and the possibility of appeal or settlement. We have a duty to disclose material risks and give a candid assessment of strengths, weaknesses, options, and downside exposure rather than promise a particular outcome.

Possible consequences include an adverse judgment, court costs allocated by the court, exposure to a counterclaim, and the loss of the remedy sought. Lawyer fees and other expenses are not automatically shifted to the other side, although a contract or law may change that analysis. We discuss appeal, settlement, and enforcement risks before the relevant decision point.

Some court information and effective judgments may be made public, subject to statutory exclusions and the court's publication rules. A party may ask for privacy or commercial-secret protection where the law permits, but confidentiality is not guaranteed. Before filing, we can discuss public-record exposure, evidence redaction, closed-hearing requests, and the commercial consequences of different strategies.

Lawyers in China have professional confidentiality duties concerning information learned in the course of practice, including commercial secrets and client privacy, subject to legal exceptions. The engagement letter should identify the client, the scope of the representation, permitted information sharing, data-handling arrangements, and any limits that apply before a formal engagement begins.