Recently, the Supreme People’s Court issued a reply regarding jurisdiction. In fact, this reply reaffirms certain practices that have long been applied in judicial practice.
In practice, where a plaintiff initiates a lawsuit, only five locations may serve as the place of jurisdiction:
The domicile of the plaintiff;
The domicile of the defendant.
The place where the contract was concluded.
The place where the contract is performed;
The location of the subject matter.
If the plaintiff and defendant agree in their contract on a jurisdiction other than these five locations, such agreed jurisdiction shall be invalid. In other words, jurisdiction may only be exercised by a place that has an actual connection with the transaction between the parties.
Another key point of this reply is that it once again clarifies: if a contract provides for both court jurisdiction and arbitration jurisdiction — that is, if it simultaneously designates an arbitration commission for arbitration and a people’s court for litigation — the arbitration agreement shall be invalid, while the agreement on the place of litigation shall remain valid.
I am Hefei lawyer Qiang Lyu. If you like my video, please like, subscribe, and save it.
The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws and legal procedures may vary depending on the specific facts and applicable jurisdiction. No lawyer-client relationship is created by reading this article or contacting us through this website. For advice regarding a specific matter, please consult a qualified lawyer after a formal engagement has been established.
Legal Contributors
Legal professionals contributing to this article and related legal analysis.
