The newly set up international commercial courts in China, which aim to serve disputes pertinent to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), represent a milestone in the juristic history of China, according to a Hong Kong senior counsel. Operating under due respect for international practices, the goal of the two courts is to ensure a sustainable legal environment for the BRI.

"In the past decade or so, there has been an emerging trend in setting up international commercial courts," says Rimsky Yuen, former Secretary for Justice of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), noting that there are such courts set up in Singapore, Dubai and Abu Dhabi.

In the meantime, Chinese courts are getting more foreign parties related commercial cases since China first announced its BRI in 2013. According to Chinese media, the number of such cases has more than doubled from 2013 to 2017, surpassing 20,000.

"The China International Commercial Courts (CICC) is established against this background, primarily, although not exclusively, handling disputes regarding the BRI," Yuen says.

"As early as 2015, China's Supreme People's Court (SPC) has already issued official documents stressing the importance of promoting international arbitrations to solve disputes," says Yuen.

In June this year, Chinese top officials announced that two CICC will be established in Shenzhen and Xi'an. In addition to settling disputes regarding the BRI, Chinese media also predicts that disputes regarding the Greater Bay Area (GBA) are likely to be handled by the CICC in Shenzhen.

In the official provisions of the SPC on the establishment of the CICC, one of the most important principles addressed in Article 11 of the regulation is party autonomy. "Party autonomy is a very important concept in international arbitration," says Yuen.

"The parties have the right to choose whether to have the dispute to be solved by the court, or by the mediation, or by the arbitration, according to Article 11. Those who want to go for mediation or arbitration will have the assistance and backup from CICC," says Yuen, adding that the parties can ask for either consultation statement or official judgement from CICC.

In addition, the CICC is able to offer assistance to parties in an emergency situation. "Sometimes, there will be emergency needs to get a court's assistance before an arbitration finishes," says Yuen. According to Article 14 of the provisions, parties may apply to the CICC for a ruling on the preservation of property, evidence or conduct before or after the arbitration proceeding commences.

"On one hand, CICC aims at providing a one-stop multi-physics dispute resolution; also, it respects party autonomy and allows the parties to have the choice. At the same time, CICC is there providing support," says Yuen.

Another important principle addressed in the provisions is diversified dispute resolution. "Nowadays, apart from court litigation, international arbitration, cross-border mediation, as well as other means of dispute resolutions such as adjudication are also important," says Yuen.

Although the nine judges of the CICC are all from the mainland, SPC has set up another more diversified body to support the courts. In August this year, it launched the International Commercial Expert Committee (ICEC), which consists of 32 law experts from mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan, as well as other jurisdictions, such as Australia and the UK. The experts will be giving advice and assisting the CICC, according to Yuen.

Coming from different legal systems and jurisdictions, the committee includes leaders of international organizations, legal experts and scholars, and experienced judges and lawyers, including leading names in the international arbitration circle, Yuen notes.

"The setting up of CICC is a milestone in the juristic history of China. It is a respect for international laws. It will ensure a sustainable legal environment for the future implementation of the BRI," says Yuen.

Yuen predicts more international courts are yet to come in other APAC jurisdictions such as Japan and Australia. "There are already so many international commercial courts in other jurisdictions. Chances are, there will be more in the pipeline," he notes.