Enforcing Judgments of Chinese Courts in Australia 在澳大利亞執行中國法院的判決
作者：鴻鵠律師事務所澳大利亞辦公室 合伙人Sophie Dawson 律師Matthew Mulcahy 2019-08-14Judgments of Chinese courts are enforceable in Australia via the common law procedure for enforcement of foreign judgments. Two such judgments have been enforced by Australian courts in recent years, most recently in February 2019.
在澳大利亞，中國法院的判決可以通過執行外國判決的普通法程序得到執行。 近年來，澳大利亞法院已經執行了兩項此類判決，最近一次是在2019年2月。
This article looks at the conditions that must be satisfied to enforce a Chinese judgment in Australia and the defences that are available to enforcement. This article will also summarise the two judgments that have been enforced and discuss the key takeaways from those judgments.
本文著眼于在澳大利亞執行中國判決必須滿足的條件以及適用于執行的抗辯。本文還將總結已經執行的兩項判決，并討論該兩項判決的關鍵要點。
This article does not apply to judgments issued by the Court of Final Appeal or the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. A separate procedure mandated by statute applies to judgments issued by these Courts.
本文不適用于香港特別行政區終審法院或高等法院作出的判決。單獨的法定程序適用于這些法院作出的判決。
Enforcing a judgment of a Chinese court in Australia
在澳大利亞執行中國法院的判決
A judgment of a Chinese court may be recognised and enforced in Australia via the common law procedure for enforcement of foreign judgments.
在澳大利亞，中國法院的判決可以通過執行外國判決的普通法程序得到承認和執行。
The plaintiff is required to commence a fresh court proceeding in Australia in order to enforce the judgment. The plaintiff may either rely on the judgment as imposing an obligation on the defendant to pay the sum, and/or base the fresh proceeding on the original cause of action and rely on the judgment of the Chinese court to estop the defendant from raising any defence which was, or could have been, raised in the Chinese proceeding.
原告為執行判決必須在澳大利亞啟動新的訴訟程序。原告可以依據對被告施加付款義務的判決，和/或將新的訴訟程序建立在原訴因之上并依據中國法院的判決，來阻止被告提出在中國的訴訟程序中已提出的或本可提出的任何抗辯。
The Australian court will generally recognise and enforce the judgment if the following four conditions are satisfied:
如果一項判決滿足以下四項條件，澳大利亞法院通常會承認并執行該判決：
1、The foreign court must have exercised jurisdiction over the defendant which Australian courts will recognise. This is normally established by proving that the defendant was either a resident of the foreign jurisdiction or had a presence in the foreign jurisdiction, or voluntarily submitted to the jurisdiction;
1、外國法院必須已經對澳大利亞法院承認的被告行使了管轄權。這通常是通過證明被告是該外國司法管轄區的居民，或曾出現在該外國司法管轄區內，或自愿接受該司法管轄區管轄來確定的；
2、The foreign judgment must be final and conclusive;
2、外國判決必須是終局的和確定的；
3、The parties to the foreign judgment and the Australian proceeding must be identical; and
3、外國判決的當事人和澳大利亞訴訟程序的當事人必須相同；
4、If based on a judgment in persona (that is, a judgment imposing a personal obligation on the defendant), the judgment must be for a fixed debt.
4、如果基于對人訴訟（即，判決對被告施加了個人義務），判決必須基于某確定的債務。
The onus rests on the party seeking to enforce the foreign judgment to establish these grounds. Once they are established, the judgment is prima facie enforceable in Australia unless the defendant can establish one or more of the recognised defences. The defences are:
證明這些理由的責任由尋求執行外國判決的當事人承擔。這些理由一旦得以確立，該判決在澳大利亞是初步可執行的，除非被告能夠確立一項或多項被認可的抗辯。這些抗辯是：
1、Where granting enforcement of the foreign judgment would be contrary to Australian public policy. This includes judgments obtained by improper means, such as duress or undue influence;
1、準予執行該外國判決將違反澳大利亞的公共政策。包括通過不正當手段獲得的判決，例如脅迫或不當影響；
2、Where the foreign judgment was obtained by fraud (including equitable fraud) by the parties or by the foreign court;
2、該外國判決是由當事人或外國法院通過欺詐（包括平衡法下的欺詐）獲得的；
3、Where the foreign judgment is penal or a judgment for a revenue debt; and
3、該外國判決涉及刑罰或是針對財政收入債務的判決；
4、Where enforcement of the decision would amount to a denial of natural justice.
4、執行該判決將構成對自然公正的否認。
It falls to the defendant to establish any of the above defences to enforcement.
上述針對執行的任何抗辯均應由被告來證明。
A defendant cannot challenge the inherent merits of the foreign decision by alleging that the foreign court made a mistake of fact or law. Moreover, a defendant cannot raise any defence in an enforcement proceeding that was, or could have been, raised in the foreign proceeding.
被告不能通過主張外國法院事實認定錯誤或法律適用錯誤來質疑外國判決的內在實質。此外，被告不能在執行程序中提出在外國訴訟程序中已提出的或本可提出的任何抗辯。
Recent Australian cases
近期的澳大利亞案例
Two judgments of Chinese courts have been recognised and enforced in Australia in recent years.
近年來，澳大利亞已經承認并執行了兩項中國法院的判決。
The first judgment was made by the People’s Court of Jiangsu Nantong Chongchuan District in April 2017. The judgment sum was RMB 3,900,000. The plaintiff applied to the Supreme Court of Victoria to recognise and enforce the judgment in Australia. The defendants did not appear before the Supreme Court, and the plaintiffs' application was therefore unopposed.
第一項判決由江蘇省南通市崇川區人民法院于2017年4月作出。判決金額為人民幣3,900,000元。原告向維多利亞州州最高法院申請在澳大利亞承認并執行該判決。被告沒有出席州最高法院的審判，因而原告的申請沒有遭到反對。
The Supreme Court was satisfied that each of the four conditions as set out above had been made out, and accordingly granted the plaintiffs' application: Liu v Ma (2017) 55 VR 104.
州最高法院認為上述四項條件中的每一個都已經滿足，并據此支持了原告的申請：Liu訴 Ma案，載于維多利亞州案例匯編2017年第55卷第104頁。
The second judgment was made by the People’s Court of Huqiu District, Suzhou City, Jiangsu Province in October 2014. The judgment sum was RMB 20,000,000. The defendants moved to Australia shortly before the judgment was delivered. The plaintiff subsequently commenced a proceeding against the defendants in the Supreme Court of Victoria, and applied for summary judgment in the proceeding based on the back of the Chinese judgment.
第二項判決由江蘇省蘇州市虎丘區人民法院于2014年10月作出。判決金額為人民幣20,000,000元。被告在判決作出前不久移居澳大利亞。隨后，原告在維多利亞州州最高法院針對被告提起了訴訟，并根據中國的判決在訴訟程序中申請簡易判決。
As in Liu v Ma, the Supreme Court was satisfied that each of the four conditions for the recognition and enforcement of the judgment had been made out, and decided to grant an order for summary judgment: Suzhou Haishun Investment Management Co Ltd v Zhao & Ors [2019] VSC 110 (Suzhou v Zhao). Notably, the Court said at [112]:
與“Liu訴Ma”案一樣，州最高法院認為承認與執行判決的四項條件中的每一項都已經滿足，并決定下令作出簡易判決：Suzhou Haishun Investment Management Co Ltd 訴Zhao及Ors案，載于維多利亞州州最高法院案例匯編2019年第110頁（以下簡稱“Suzhou訴Zhao案”）。值得注意的是，法院在第[112]頁明確：
It is inevitable that if an individual is subject to and submits to the laws and procedures of a foreign jurisdiction then, unless it offends this Court’s principles of justice or fairness encapsulated in the rule of law, it is appropriate for this Court to have regard to the decisions of that foreign jurisdiction as the basis to make an order for summary judgment.
如果某個人受外國司法管轄區的法律和程序的約束并服從該外國司法管轄區的法律和程序，除非違反了本院的正義或公平之法治原則，否則本院將該外國司法管轄區的判決視為作出簡易判決命令的依據，是適當且不可避免的。
These decisions indicate that in the right circumstances, Australian courts will recognise and enforce judgments of Chinese courts. They also provide some guidance as to the facts that an Australian court may take into account in determining whether a Chinese court exercised a recognisable jurisdiction over a defendant. In both cases, the fact that the defendants were natural citizens of China and each held a Chinese passport and identity card weighed in favour of a finding that the relevant Chinese court exercised a recognisable jurisdiction over the defendants. Other relevant factors included that the defendants had substantial activities and financial affairs in China (in the case of Liu v Ma), and that the defendants had contractually submitted to the jurisdiction of the relevant Chinese Court (in the case of Suzhou v Zhao).
這兩項判決表明，在適當的情況下，澳大利亞法院將承認并執行中國法院的判決。 這兩項判決還就澳大利亞法院在認定中國法院是否對被告行使了可承認的管轄權時可能考慮的事實提供了一些指引。在這兩起案件中，被告都是中國自然公民并持有中國護照和身份證的事實有利于判定相關中國法院對被告行使了可承認的管轄權。其他相關因素包括被告在中國有大量活動和經濟事務（在“Liu 訴 Ma案”中），并且被告已經按照合同接受相關中國法院管轄（在“Suzhou訴Zhao案”中）。
作者（Author)：
Sophie Dawson
鴻鵠律師事務所澳大利亞辦公室
Bird & Bird LLP Australia Offices
合伙人
Partner
Matthew Mulcahy
鴻鵠律師事務所澳大利亞辦公室
Bird & Bird LLP Australia Offices
律師
Associate
譯者：
劉炯 John Liu
錦天城律師事務所
AllBright Law Offices
高級合伙人
Senior Partner
湯旻利 Minli Tang
錦天城律師事務所
AllBright Law Offices
律師
Associate
胡晨奕 Chenyi Hu
錦天城律師事務所
AllBright Law Offices
實習助理
Intern
