IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/envlaw/v37y2025i3p609-616..html

Prioritization of environmental costs in Chinese insolvency law: guiding case no. 214 of China's Supreme People's Court

Author

Listed:
  • Xingwei Li
  • Xiaodan Wang

Abstract

This analysis explores the landmark Sancha Harbour judgment delivered by China's Supreme People's Court in which environmental liabilities were defined as common interest debts prioritized in insolvency proceedings. This judgment represents a pivotal development in Chinese insolvency law, setting a precedent that reflects the judiciary's growing emphasis on environmental protection, especially during corporate reorganizations. The analysis assesses the challenges of balancing economic growth with environmental responsibility and explores the broader implications of internalizing environmental costs in insolvency cases. It also highlights the uncertainty surrounding the uniform application of the precedent and emphasizes the need to integrate financial instruments such as environmental insurance and dedicated funds to manage these costs efficiently.

Suggested Citation

  • Xingwei Li & Xiaodan Wang, 2025. "Prioritization of environmental costs in Chinese insolvency law: guiding case no. 214 of China's Supreme People's Court," Journal of Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(3), pages 609-616.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:envlaw:v:37:y:2025:i:3:p:609-616.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jel/eqaf023
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:envlaw:v:37:y:2025:i:3:p:609-616.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jel .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.