THE KOLMAR V. SUTEX CASE ON RECIPROCITY IN FOREIGN JUDGMENTS ENFORCEMENT IN CHINA: A WELCOME DEVELOPMENT OR STILL ON THE WRONG TRACK?

Abstract

In December 2016, the Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court in China issued its ruling in the Kolmar v. Sutex case, where a monetary judgment from Singapore was recognized and enforced against a local textile company. The case confirms that once a foreign country has taken the initiative, Chinese courts will follow up to enforce judgments from that country reciprocally. This is the doctrine of de facto reciprocity adopted by some Chinese courts. The paper surveys the judicial practice of Chinese courts and finds that this area of law is full of confusion and uncertainties due to the lack of applicable rules. Recent developments suggest that China may move away from this approach and adopt a relaxed version of reciprocity, which is worthy of close attention.

Key words： recognition and enforcement of foreign judgment; reciprocity; de facto reciprocity; obligation doctrine