How to Enforce Contracts in China 2026: Courts, Arbitration, Mediation, a 6‑step Checklist

Understanding how to enforce contracts in China has never been more consequential, or more complex, than it is right now. Three landmark regulatory changes that took effect in the first half of 2026 have reshaped the enforcement landscape for domestic and cross-border commercial agreements: the Revised Foreign Trade Law and the Revised Arbitration Law (both effective March 1, 2026) and the Regulations on Commercial Mediation (effective May 1, 2026). Together, these instruments alter forum-selection calculus, broaden customs and trade-countermeasure powers, and give commercial mediation settlements a clearer path to enforcement for the first time.

This guide provides in-house counsel, commercial managers and external advisers with a practical, step-by-step framework for choosing the right enforcement route, preserving assets and executing judgments or awards in the People’s Republic of China.

Key 2026 Legislative Dates That Affect Contract Enforcement in China

Before selecting a forum or filing a claim, practitioners must understand the timeline of the three instruments now governing contract enforcement China-wide. Each carries distinct consequences for remedies, interim measures and enforceability.

The foreign trade law 2026 changes are particularly significant for companies whose contracts involve the import or export of goods: customs detention can now function as a de facto asset-preservation tool even before formal litigation or arbitration commences. Meanwhile, the revised arbitration law 2026 removes much of the ambiguity that historically surrounded the concept of an arbitral “seat” in China, giving parties greater certainty when drafting dispute-resolution clauses. Industry observers expect the commercial mediation regulation 2026 to drive a measurable shift in how companies resolve mid-value disputes, since the new judicial-confirmation mechanism eliminates the historical weakness of mediation, namely, the difficulty of enforcing a settlement against a recalcitrant counterparty.

Choice of Forum: Arbitration vs Litigation China, and When to Mediate

The threshold decision in any enforcement strategy is selecting the right dispute-resolution mechanism. That choice now depends on three variables: the nature of the contract, the location of assets, and the 2026 regulatory environment.

When to Choose Chinese Courts

Litigation remains the most direct route when the defendant’s assets are in mainland China and the dispute involves a domestic contract governed by PRC law. Chinese courts offer powerful interim relief, including pre-action property preservation and the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) blacklist mechanism, which restricts a debtor’s ability to travel, purchase property or borrow money. However, court proceedings can be lengthy, appellate routes add further delays, and enforcement against state-connected entities sometimes requires patience. Forum-selection clauses specifying a particular Chinese court are generally upheld, provided the chosen venue has a genuine connection to the dispute.

When to Choose Arbitration

Arbitration is typically preferable for cross-border contracts and disputes involving foreign parties. Under the revised arbitration law 2026, China now formally recognises the concept of an arbitral seat independent from the administering institution’s location, reducing the risk of jurisdictional challenges. Where the counterparty’s assets are located abroad, a China-seated arbitration still benefits from the New York Convention framework for cross-border recognition. Conversely, a foreign-seated arbitration (e.g., Singapore, Hong Kong or London) can be enforced in China via court recognition, though this adds a procedural layer and grounds for refusal exist.

Mediation’s New Status Under the Commercial Mediation Regulation 2026

Commercial mediation has historically been underused in China because settlement agreements lacked direct enforceability. The Regulations on Commercial Mediation, effective May 1, 2026, change this calculus by creating a formal mechanism for judicial confirmation of mediated settlements. Once confirmed, a settlement carries the same enforcement authority as a court judgment. Early indications suggest that this pathway is most effective for commercial disputes where both parties seek a continued business relationship and where the primary enforcement concern is payment, not injunctive relief.

Comparison Table: Litigation, Arbitration and Mediation

Courts: How to Sue and Enforce a Chinese Judgment

For practitioners who determine that litigation is the optimal route, the process of contract enforcement China courts follow is governed by the Civil Procedure Law, the PRC Civil Code and, as of 2026, the expanded customs and trade powers under the Revised Foreign Trade Law. Below is a step-by-step breakdown.

Jurisdiction and Venue Rules

A plaintiff generally files at the court where the defendant is domiciled or where the contract was performed. Parties may agree to a specific court by inserting a forum-selection clause, provided the chosen venue has a substantive connection to the dispute (e.g., the defendant’s domicile, place of contract formation, or place of performance). Foreign parties should note that Chinese courts will not accept jurisdiction clauses that attempt to give exclusive competence to a foreign court if the dispute falls under PRC mandatory-jurisdiction rules, for instance, disputes over real property in China or joint-venture contracts with a Chinese entity.

Filing the Action: Evidence, Translation and Notarisation

All submissions must be in Chinese. Foreign-language documents require certified translations, and documents originating abroad must be notarised and apostilled (or consularised, depending on the originating country). Practitioners should prepare an evidence map early, identifying the key contracts, correspondence, payment records and performance evidence. Chinese courts place heavy weight on documentary evidence; witness testimony alone is often insufficient. It is advisable to have original copies of all chops (company seals) and signed agreements available, as courts may request originals during proceedings.

Interim Relief and Asset Preservation

One of the most powerful tools available to enforce contracts in China is the pre-action or pre-judgment asset preservation order. Chinese courts can freeze bank accounts, seize movable property and restrain the transfer of real estate before a judgment is handed down. In urgent cases, a preservation application can be filed before or simultaneously with the statement of claim. The SPC’s enforcement blacklist mechanism, formally known as the List of Dishonest Persons Subject to Enforcement, imposes practical sanctions on non-compliant debtors, restricting their ability to take flights, purchase luxury goods, secure loans or register new businesses.

An asset preservation application should include the following:

Execution: Enforcing the Judgment

Once a judgment becomes enforceable (after the appeal period lapses or an appeal is resolved), the winning party applies to the court’s execution division. The court then issues enforcement notices, conducts asset investigations and, where necessary, employs coercive measures including wage garnishment, property auctions and the blacklist. Enforcement timelines vary by court and complexity, but industry observers note that enforcement in major commercial centres such as Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen has improved significantly in recent years, with many straightforward money judgments executed within six to twelve months.

Arbitration: Securing and Enforcing Awards After the Revised Arbitration Law 2026

China is a signatory to the New York Convention, and its domestic arbitration infrastructure is anchored by institutions such as the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), the Beijing Arbitration Commission (BAC) and the Shanghai International Arbitration Center (SHIAC). The revised arbitration law 2026 brings several changes that directly affect how to enforce contracts in China through the arbitral route.

Seat Selection Strategy

Under the revised law, the concept of an arbitral seat is now explicitly codified. Parties choosing a China seat benefit from streamlined domestic enforcement: the award is treated as a domestic award and enforced by the competent intermediate people’s court. For cross-border contracts where the counterparty’s assets are primarily outside China, a foreign seat (Hong Kong, Singapore, London) may be preferable, though enforcement within China then requires a recognition application under the New York Convention. The key strategic question is where the debtor’s assets sit. If assets are in China, a China seat typically provides faster enforcement. If assets are scattered globally, a foreign seat with broad recognition treaty coverage may be more efficient overall.

Emergency and Interim Relief

The revised law expands provisions for arbitral institutions to adopt emergency procedures and appoint emergency arbitrators. This is a notable development for practitioners who previously had to rely exclusively on Chinese courts for interim preservation measures. In practice, courts remain the primary vehicle for asset freezes and injunctions, but the expanded arbitral powers now allow a parallel application for emergency relief through the institution itself, particularly useful where speed is critical and court filing timelines may lag.

Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in China

For domestic awards, the losing party has six months from receipt to apply to a court to set aside the award. Grounds for refusal are narrow and procedurally focused (e.g., improper constitution of the tribunal, procedural irregularities, or the dispute falling outside the scope of the arbitration agreement). For foreign awards, the competent intermediate people’s court reviews the application under the New York Convention’s limited grounds for refusal: lack of a valid agreement, lack of proper notice, award exceeding the scope of submission, improper tribunal composition, or public-policy concerns. The SPC’s internal reporting mechanism, which requires lower courts to report proposed refusals of foreign award enforcement up through the judicial hierarchy, provides an additional safeguard against arbitrary local refusal.

Model arbitration clause (China seat, with emergency and mediation provisions):

“Any dispute arising out of or in connection with this Contract shall first be submitted to mediation in accordance with the mediation rules of [Institution]. If the dispute is not settled within 30 days, it shall be referred to and resolved by arbitration administered by [CIETAC / BAC / SHIAC] in [City], China, in accordance with its arbitration rules in effect at the time of filing. The tribunal shall consist of three arbitrators. Emergency arbitrator provisions shall apply. The language of the arbitration shall be [English / Chinese]. The seat of arbitration shall be [City], China.”

Mediation: What the Commercial Mediation Regulation 2026 Changes

New Legal Status of Mediation Settlements

The Regulations on Commercial Mediation, effective May 1, 2026, represent China’s first comprehensive national-level regulation dedicated to commercial mediation. The regulation establishes a clear pathway for parties to apply for judicial confirmation of a mediated settlement agreement. Once a competent people’s court issues a confirmation ruling, the settlement becomes directly enforceable through the court’s execution division, eliminating the historical gap between reaching a mediated agreement and actually compelling performance. This is a significant shift for companies that previously viewed mediation as a “soft” option with no enforcement teeth.

Using Mediation as a Strategic Enforcement Tool

The likely practical effect of the 2026 regulation will be to encourage the use of hybrid dispute-resolution clauses, commonly structured as “med-arb” clauses, where parties agree to mediate first, with arbitration or litigation as a fallback if mediation fails within a specified window. Such clauses are now more attractive because the mediation stage itself can produce an enforceable outcome. Practitioners drafting commercial mediation clauses should specify the mediation institution, the time limit for the mediation phase, the language and location of proceedings, and an express provision triggering judicial confirmation upon settlement.

Template mediation-enforcement clause:

“Upon reaching a mediated settlement, either party may apply to the competent people’s court for judicial confirmation in accordance with the Regulations on Commercial Mediation. The confirmed settlement shall be enforceable as a court judgment.”

How to Enforce IP Rights in China: Specialised Remedies

Intellectual-property enforcement in China follows multiple overlapping tracks, administrative, civil and criminal, each with different speed, cost and deterrence profiles. Customs seizure China procedures allow IP rights holders who have registered their rights with the General Administration of Customs to request detention of suspected infringing goods at the border. Administrative enforcement through local Market Regulation Bureaus provides a faster (though typically lower-compensation) route for trademark and patent disputes. China’s specialised IP courts in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou handle complex civil IP claims and can award damages, injunctions and evidence-preservation orders. For serious counterfeiting, a criminal referral to the Public Security Bureau may result in prosecution and asset forfeiture.

The practical challenge is coordination: effective IP enforcement often requires running administrative, customs and civil tracks simultaneously, supported by a comprehensive evidence-preservation strategy conducted before the infringer becomes aware of the proceedings.

Customs, Preservation and Cross-Border Asset Tools Under the Foreign Trade Law 2026

The Revised Foreign Trade Law, effective March 1, 2026, expands the toolkit available to customs and trade authorities in ways that have direct consequences for contract enforcement. Customs authorities now have broader discretion to detain goods where there is evidence of contractual fraud, IP infringement or violation of trade-compliance obligations. For parties involved in cross-border supply-chain disputes, this creates a powerful preservation mechanism: customs detention of goods in transit can effectively freeze the subject matter of a dispute while formal proceedings are initiated.

To request an urgent customs hold, a rights holder or claimant should file a written application with the relevant customs office, attaching evidence of the underlying claim, details of the shipment and, where applicable, proof of IP registration. Industry observers expect that the 2026 trade law changes will also strengthen authorities’ willingness to impose trade countermeasures, including export/import restrictions, as enforcement leverage in disputes involving foreign parties.

The 6-Step Operational Checklist for Enforcing Contracts in China

The following checklist distils the enforcement process into six actionable stages. Each step is designed to be implementable whether the chosen forum is litigation, arbitration or mediation.

1. Review governing law, forum clauses and build an evidence map. Identify the dispute-resolution mechanism in the contract. Verify whether Chinese law governs. Assemble all contracts, correspondence, payment records, delivery documents and seal/chop evidence. Prepare certified translations of any foreign-language documents.
2. Apply for preservation and emergency measures. File a pre-action or pre-arbitration asset-preservation application with the competent court. For IP or trade disputes, file a customs detention request. If the arbitration clause provides for emergency procedures, apply through the administering institution simultaneously. Post any required security bond.
3. Initiate formal dispute resolution. File the claim, whether a court action, arbitration request or mediation application. Select the optimal seat and institution based on the location of the counterparty’s assets and the enforcement treaties applicable. Ensure all powers of attorney are notarised, legalised and filed.
4. Secure the judgment, award or confirmed settlement. Prosecute the case through to a final, enforceable outcome. For mediation, apply for judicial confirmation under the 2026 regulation promptly upon settlement.
5. Commence recognition and enforcement. For domestic court judgments, apply to the execution division of the rendering court. For domestic arbitral awards, apply to the competent intermediate people’s court. For foreign awards, file a New York Convention recognition application. For cross-border judgments, check bilateral treaty coverage or apply under reciprocity principles.
6. Post-enforcement recovery and sanctions. Monitor compliance. If the debtor fails to pay, request SPC blacklist inclusion, property auctions, wage garnishment or other coercive measures. Conduct ongoing asset tracing to identify concealed or transferred assets.

Practical Templates and Next Steps

The following templates serve as starting points for practitioners structuring their enforcement strategy. All clauses should be adapted to the specific transaction and reviewed by PRC-qualified counsel before use.

• Sample jurisdiction clause (Chinese courts): “Any dispute arising from or in connection with this Contract shall be submitted to the jurisdiction of the [Beijing / Shanghai / Shenzhen] Intermediate People’s Court.”
• Sample arbitration clause (China seat): See the model clause provided in the arbitration section above, incorporating emergency arbitrator and mediation-first provisions.
• Sample mediation-enforcement clause: See the template clause in the mediation section above, specifying judicial confirmation under the 2026 regulation.
• Power-of-attorney checklist: Ensure the POA names the specific PRC counsel, specifies the scope of authority (filing, settlement, appeal, enforcement), is executed under the laws of the appointing party’s jurisdiction, and is notarised and legalised (apostilled or consularised) for use in China.
• Asset preservation application checklist: See the five-item table in the courts section above; adapt quantities and specifics to the target assets.

Conclusion

The 2026 legislative reforms give commercial parties more tools, and more strategic flexibility, when enforcing contracts in China. Whether the optimal route is litigation, arbitration or the newly strengthened mediation pathway, the critical success factors remain the same: early forum analysis, aggressive preservation of assets, meticulous evidence preparation and prompt execution once an enforceable outcome is secured. The six-step checklist outlined in this guide provides a repeatable, practical framework for how to enforce contracts in China in the current regulatory environment. Parties with active or anticipated disputes should review their existing contract portfolios against the 2026 changes and update dispute-resolution clauses accordingly.

Sources

1. State Council, Revised Foreign Trade Law (effective March 1, 2026)
2. State Council, Regulations on Commercial Mediation (effective May 1, 2026)
3. Mishcon de Reya, China’s Arbitration Law Overhauled: Key Changes Effective 1 March 2026
4. CMS Expert Guide, Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments: China
5. Nexus Arb, Revised PRC Arbitration Law (English Translation)
6. China Briefing, China’s Revised Foreign Trade Law 2026: Business Implications