International arbitration and cross-border dispute resolution: developments from the 2026 China Arbitration Summit

2026-10-10 Foreign Litigation / 涉外诉讼, International Arbitration / 国际仲裁, Policy Updates / 政策动态

• The 2026 China Arbitration Summit and the High-Level Dialogue on China’s Maritime and Commercial Arbitration were held in Beijing, coinciding with the 60th anniversary of UNCITRAL and the 70th anniversary of CIETAC.
  2026中国仲裁高峰论坛暨中国海事商事仲裁高级别对话会在北京召开，恰逢联合国国际贸易法委员会成立60周年、中国国际经济贸易仲裁委员会成立70周年。

• Supreme People’s Court Vice-President Gao Xiaoli said the Court has worked to build an “arbitration-friendly” judicial environment through judicial interpretations, an annual arbitration report, compilations of typical cases and joint arbitrator-judge training, and will keep improving the quality and efficiency of judicial review of arbitration.
  最高人民法院副院长、二级大法官高晓力表示，最高法通过制定司法解释、发布仲裁年度报告、汇编典型案例、开展仲裁员与法官联合培训等务实举措，努力打造”仲裁友好型”司法环境，并将不断提升仲裁司法审查工作质效。

• UNCITRAL Secretary Anna Joubin-Bret noted that since CIETAC became an observer in 2009 it has engaged deeply in topics such as electronic arbitration awards and the use of artificial intelligence in arbitration, and said UNCITRAL is ready to work with all parties to improve international commercial arbitration rules.
  联合国国际贸易法委员会秘书长安娜·茹班-布雷指出，贸仲自2009年成为贸法会观察员以来，深度参与电子仲裁裁决、人工智能在仲裁中的应用等议题研讨，并表示贸法会愿与各方携手完善国际商事仲裁规则。

• Supreme People’s Court Judge Shen Hongyu said Chinese courts fully implement the new Arbitration Law in judicial review, apply the New York Convention accurately, perform convention obligations in good faith and define public policy strictly and prudently, while promoting the alignment of litigation, arbitration and mediation.
  最高人民法院民四庭庭长沈红雨表示，中国法院在司法审查过程中全面贯彻落实新仲裁法有关规定，准确适用《纽约公约》，善意履行公约义务，严格审慎界定公共政策，并积极促进诉讼与仲裁、调解有机衔接。

• Teresa Cheng, Secretary-General of the International Organization for Mediation, said mediation — a dispute-resolution approach reflecting Eastern wisdom — is gaining wider international recognition as rules such as the Singapore Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Mediation take effect.
  国际调解院秘书长郑若骅表示，调解作为体现东方智慧的争议解决方式，随着《新加坡公约》和《国际商事调解示范法》等国际规则落地，日益获得国际社会广泛认可。

• The statements rest on a legislative background in which the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress revised the Arbitration Law, the Maritime Code and the Foreign Trade Law in 2025, with the revisions taking effect from 2026.
  上述表态建立在立法背景之上：2025年全国人大常委会先后修订仲裁法、海商法和对外贸易法，均自2026年起相继施行。

• For foreign companies, the practical points are analytical: dispute-resolution clause design, the cross-border enforcement basis for arbitral awards, confidentiality, arbitrator selection and the boundaries of judicial review in China.
  对境外企业而言，实务要点属分析性内容：争议解决条款设计、仲裁裁决跨境执行的依据、程序保密性、仲裁员选定，以及在中国境内进行仲裁司法审查的救济边界。

International arbitration and cross-border dispute resolution: developments from the 2026 China Arbitration Summit | 国际仲裁与跨境争议解决：2026中国仲裁高峰论坛的新进展

Overview

In October 2026, the 2026 China Arbitration Summit and the High-Level Dialogue on China’s Maritime and Commercial Arbitration were held in Beijing. The gathering coincided with two anniversaries: the 60th anniversary of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and the 70th anniversary of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC).

Speakers set out the direction of China’s international arbitration development. Among them were Gao Xiaoli, Vice-President and a second-grade Grand Justice of the Supreme People’s Court; Anna Joubin-Bret, Secretary-General of UNCITRAL; Shen Hongyu, Chief Judge of the No. 4 Civil Division of the Supreme People’s Court; Teresa Cheng, Secretary-General of the International Organization for Mediation; and Yang Xiangbin, Director-General of the Public Legal Services Administration of the Ministry of Justice.

Key statements from the summit

On the judiciary. Gao Xiaoli said that over the past 60 years UNCITRAL has made an outstanding contribution to unifying the rules of international trade law. In recent years, she said, the Supreme People’s Court has worked to build an “arbitration-friendly” judicial environment through a series of practical measures: issuing judicial interpretations, publishing an annual arbitration report, compiling typical cases, and running joint training for arbitrators and judges. Going forward, the courts will, as before, support arbitration and will keep improving the quality and efficiency of judicial review of arbitration.

On the arbitral institution and international rules. Anna Joubin-Bret noted that since CIETAC became an observer to UNCITRAL in 2009, it has engaged deeply in discussions on topics such as electronic arbitration awards and the use of artificial intelligence in arbitration, and has carried out innovative practice in handling cases under UNCITRAL arbitration rules. She said UNCITRAL is ready to work with all parties to improve the rules of international commercial arbitration.

On judicial review and enforcement. Shen Hongyu said that, to advance the high-quality development of China’s international arbitration, Chinese courts in judicial review fully implement the relevant provisions of the new Arbitration Law, apply the New York Convention accurately, perform convention obligations in good faith and define public policy strictly and prudently, firmly safeguarding the public interest. Courts also actively promote the organic alignment of litigation, arbitration and mediation and work to build China into a preferred venue for the resolution of international commercial disputes. Going forward, he said, the courts will continue to perform their New York Convention obligations, implement the contents of the newly revised Arbitration Law, and do the supporting judicial interpretation work.

On mediation. Teresa Cheng said that mediation — a dispute-resolution approach that embodies Eastern wisdom — is gaining wider recognition in the international community as rules such as the Singapore Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Mediation take effect. She described the International Organization for Mediation as the first intergovernmental international legal organization dedicated to resolving international disputes through mediation.

Yang Xiangbin of the Ministry of Justice also delivered a keynote speech.

Legislative background

The remarks build on a legislative background. According to public materials, in 2025 the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress successively revised the Arbitration Law, the Maritime Code and the Foreign Trade Law, with the revisions taking effect from 2026. The summit remarks therefore sit alongside a period in which China’s arbitration and foreign-related commercial legislation is being updated.

Practical implications for foreign companies

The following points are analytical observations, not statements of official policy. They summarise considerations commonly relevant to foreign companies when structuring cross-border dispute resolution involving China.

• Dispute-resolution clause design. In foreign-related contracts, the dispute-resolution clause typically addresses the arbitral institution, the seat of arbitration, the governing law, the language and the number of arbitrators. These choices determine where and how a dispute will be heard and are usually settled at the drafting stage.
• Cross-border enforcement. A key advantage of arbitration in cross-border disputes is that awards can be enforced across borders under the New York Convention, which the summit remarks described Chinese courts as applying accurately and in good faith. The enforceability of an award in the place where assets are located is usually a central drafting consideration.
• Confidentiality and expertise. Arbitration proceedings are generally confidential, and parties can select arbitrators with relevant technical or industry expertise — both are common reasons parties choose arbitration over litigation for commercial disputes.
• Alignment of mediation and arbitration. The summit highlighted the alignment of litigation, arbitration and mediation. Foreign companies may consider whether a tiered clause — mediation first, then arbitration — suits their commercial relationship, while noting that the enforceability of a mediated settlement depends on the applicable international framework.
• Judicial review in China. Where an award is challenged or enforcement is resisted before a Chinese court, the review is conducted within the boundaries of Chinese law, including the strict and prudent approach to public policy described at the summit. Understanding these boundaries is relevant when assessing enforcement risk.

Related considerations

The summit remarks are best read as a statement of direction: a supportive judicial posture towards arbitration, continued engagement with international rules, and an emphasis on aligning litigation, arbitration and mediation. For a foreign company, the practical value lies in the detail of contract drafting and enforcement planning rather than in any single announcement. Companies typically confirm the current state of the applicable law, convention obligations and institutional rules before finalising a dispute-resolution strategy.

Sources

• 新浪新闻（转载）— 2026中国仲裁高峰论坛暨中国海事商事仲裁高级别对话会报道（据公开报道）: https://k.sina.com.cn/article_7746897562_1cdc0469a00101d5iq.html
• 光明网（光明日报 2026-10-02 07版）— 《构建具有国际竞争力的商事仲裁体系》: https://news.gmw.cn/2026-10/02/content_39030858.htm
• 西部法治报 — 西安仲裁委涉外仲裁实践（地方仲裁机构实践案例）: https://www.xbfzb.com/2026-10/09/content_20147177.html

国际仲裁与跨境争议解决：2026中国仲裁高峰论坛的新进展

概述

2026年10月，2026中国仲裁高峰论坛暨中国海事商事仲裁高级别对话会在北京召开。此次会议恰逢两个周年节点：联合国国际贸易法委员会成立60周年与中国国际经济贸易仲裁委员会成立70周年。

多位发言者就中国国际仲裁的发展方向作了阐述。其中包括最高人民法院副院长、二级大法官高晓力，联合国国际贸易法委员会秘书长安娜·茹班-布雷，最高人民法院民四庭庭长沈红雨，国际调解院秘书长郑若骅，以及司法部公共法律服务管理局局长杨向斌。

会议主要表态

关于司法支持。 高晓力表示，60年来联合国国际贸易法委员会在推动国际贸易法律规则统一方面作出了卓越贡献。她表示，近年来最高人民法院通过一系列务实举措，努力打造“仲裁友好型”司法环境，具体包括制定司法解释、发布仲裁年度报告、汇编典型案例、开展仲裁员与法官联合培训等。下一步，法院将一如既往支持仲裁，不断提升仲裁司法审查工作质效。

关于仲裁机构与国际规则。 安娜·茹班-布雷指出，贸仲自2009年成为贸法会观察员以来，深度参与电子仲裁裁决、人工智能在仲裁中的应用等议题研讨，并在适用贸法会仲裁规则处理案件方面开展创新性实践。她表示，贸法会愿与各方携手完善国际商事仲裁规则。

关于司法审查与执行。 沈红雨表示，为推进中国国际仲裁高质量发展，中国法院在司法审查过程中全面贯彻落实新仲裁法有关规定，准确适用《纽约公约》，善意履行公约义务，严格审慎界定公共政策，坚定维护社会公共利益。法院还积极促进诉讼与仲裁、调解有机衔接，积极打造国际商事争端解决优选地。他表示，下一步法院将继续履行《纽约公约》义务，落实新修订仲裁法的各项内容，并做好配套司法解释工作。

关于调解。 郑若骅表示，调解作为体现东方智慧的争议解决方式，随着《新加坡公约》和《国际商事调解示范法》等国际规则落地，日益获得国际社会广泛认可。她将国际调解院描述为国际上首个专门以调解方式解决国际争端的政府间国际法律组织。

司法部杨向斌亦发表主旨演讲。

立法背景

上述表态建立在立法背景之上。据公开资料，2025年全国人大常委会先后修订仲裁法、海商法和对外贸易法，均自2026年起相继施行。因此，本次论坛的相关表态，与中国仲裁及涉外商业立法正在更新的时期相叠加。

对境外企业的实务意义

以下要点为分析性观察，并非官方政策表述。它们归纳的是境外企业在安排涉华跨境争议解决时通常需要考量的因素。

• 争议解决条款设计。 在涉外合同中，争议解决条款通常涉及仲裁机构、仲裁地、适用法律、语言与仲裁员人数。这些选择决定了争议将在何处、以何种方式审理，一般在合同起草阶段即予以确定。
• 跨境执行。 仲裁在跨境争议中的一项关键优势，是裁决可依据《纽约公约》跨境执行，而本次论坛表态将中国法院描述为准确、善意地适用该公约。裁决能否在资产所在地获得执行，通常是起草时的核心考量。
• 保密性与专业性。 仲裁程序一般具有保密性，且当事人可选任具备相关技术或行业专长的仲裁员——这两点常是商事争议中当事人选择仲裁而非诉讼的原因。
• 调解与仲裁的衔接。 本次论坛强调诉讼、仲裁与调解的有机衔接。境外企业可考虑分级条款——先调解、后仲裁——是否契合其商业关系，同时注意经调解达成和解的可执行性取决于所适用的国际框架。
• 在中国境内的司法审查。 当裁决在中国法院被申请撤销或执行受到异议时，审查在中国法律框架内进行，包括本次论坛所述的严格审慎界定公共政策。了解这些边界，对于评估执行风险具有意义。

相关考量

本次论坛表态宜理解为方向性说明：对仲裁持支持态度的司法立场、与国际规则的持续衔接，以及对诉讼、仲裁与调解相衔接的强调。对境外企业而言，其实际价值更多体现在合同起草与执行规划的细节，而非某一份单独公告。企业在最终确定争议解决策略前，通常会先确认现行法律、公约义务与机构规则的当前状态。

来源

• 新浪新闻（转载）— 2026中国仲裁高峰论坛暨中国海事商事仲裁高级别对话会报道（据公开报道）: https://k.sina.com.cn/article_7746897562_1cdc0469a00101d5iq.html
• 光明网（光明日报 2026-10-02 07版）— 《构建具有国际竞争力的商事仲裁体系》: https://news.gmw.cn/2026-10/02/content_39030858.htm
• 西部法治报 — 西安仲裁委涉外仲裁实践（地方仲裁机构实践案例）: https://www.xbfzb.com/2026-10/09/content_20147177.html