Originally from World Arbitration and Mediation Review (WAMR)

ABSTRACT

The Arbitration Law of the People’s Republic of China (PRC or China), promulgated in 1995, has long been characterized by its significant disparity from prevailing international commercial arbitration practices. Despite its partial amendments in 2009 and 2017, the Arbitration Law still has failed to substantially bridge the gap with the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, adopted in 1985 (Model Law). To serve China’s opening up to this high standard and promote the use of arbitration, and at the same time, strenuously enhance China’s influence and competitiveness as a seat for international commercial arbitration, the first comprehensive revision of the Arbitration Law was formally adopted on September 12, 2025. The revised Arbitration Law effectuates a marked convergence with the Model Law through the formal incorporation of the legal concept of the “seat” of arbitration, the explicit recognition of the arbitral tribunal’s kompetenz-kompetenz, the enrichment and improvement of interim measures, the reduction of the time limit to apply to set aside an arbitral award, and the validation of ad hoc arbitration for specific categories of foreign-related disputes. These reforms collectively underscore China’s resolve and effort to establish a world-class center for international commercial arbitration. Nevertheless, this comprehensive revision constitutes an incremental rather than a transformative alignment. It has not entirely eliminated the discrepancies and gaps between Chinese arbitration legislation and the Model Law. To fully embrace international best practices in commercial arbitration and to forge a globally competitive and attractive arbitral hub, China’s arbitration legislation must continue its trajectory of progressive reform.

[...]

This article will take the highlights of the New Arbitration Law as the starting point and conduct a comprehensive, systematic comparative study between the New Arbitration Law and the Model Law. It aims to analyze whether the enactment and implementation of the New Arbitration Law can significantly narrow the gap between China and the so-called Model Law country, and will identify which aspects of institutional design deviations from a Model Law country persist. Finally, drawing on the template provided by the Model Law and the prevailing practices of international commercial arbitration, this article will offer recommendations for further enhancement and refinement of China’s arbitration legislation, as well as for efforts to shape China as a global commercial arbitration center.