The Belt and Road Initiative: conflict of laws and dispute resolution

Purpose - This paper aims to determine the adaptability of China’s legal system in recognizing and enforcing foreign judgements in China. Design/methodology/approach - Academic articles, case law and books are examined as are relevant reports by various regulatory authorities and organizations. Findings - Historically, Chinese courts have strictly adhered to “de factoreciprocity”, which made it difficult for foreign judgements to be recognized and enforced in China. Fortunately, Chinese courts have since abandoned their rigid adherence tode factoreciprocity, and have instead, used flexible tests of reciprocity such asde jurereciprocity, reciprocal commitment and reciprocal understand/consensus. Accordingly, this would facilitate the recovery of stolen assets, as there is a lower threshold for the recognition and enforcement of a foreign judgement. Research limitations/implications - There are limited data available in relation to the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgements pertaining to the recovery of stolen assets. Any discussions within this paper are based on the impressionistic observations of this author, which may not reflect the true state of affairs within the Belt and Road Initiative. Practical implications - Those who are interested in examining the viability in recognizing and enforcing foreign judgements relating to stolen assets will have an interest in this topic. Originality/value - The value of the paper is to demonstrate the difficulties in recognizing and enforcing foreign judgements in China in relation to stolen assets.