The German newspaper “Handelsblatt” has brought an article headed “Schiedsgericht für Europa und China“ dated 22 September 2008.

An article has also been published by the German “Manager-Magazin” on 19 September 2008 headed “Ein Schiedsgericht für alle”, which can be found under: http://www.manager-magazin.de/unternehmen/mittelstand/0,2828,578931,00.html.

On 10 September 2008 the German newspaper “Die Welt” published an introductory article on the Chinese European Arbitration Centre on the front page of its Hamburg edition.

The Article can be found under: http://www.welt.de/hamburg/article2419336/Internationales-Schiedsgericht-fuer-Hamburg.html.

The article reads:

Hamburg bekommt internationales Schiedsgericht
Von Martin Kopp

Neue Institution soll Streitfälle zwischen Kaufleuten aus China und anderen Nationen schlichten - Festakt im Rathaus

Hamburg erhält nach dem internationalen Seegerichtshof eine weitere Rechtsinstanz von Weltrang. Die Hansestadt wird Standort eines chinesisch-europäischen Schiedsgerichts, das weltweit Schiedsverfahren zwischen Unternehmen mit China-Bezug betreuen wird.

Das sogenannte CEAC (Chinese European Arbitration Centre) wird am 18. September mit einem Festakt im Rathaus feierlich eröffnet. Träger des Gerichts ist ein Verein, den die Hanseatische Rechtsanwaltskammer, die Handelskammer Hamburg, der Tönissteiner Kreis sowie über 50 Rechtsanwälte und Kanzleien aus 13 Nationen ins Leben gerufen haben, darunter Argentinien, Neuseeland, die USA und Indonesien. Das Schiedsgericht wird seinen Sitz am Adolphsplatz 1 bei der Handelskammer haben.

Ziel des Projekts ist es, eine Rechtsinstanz zu schaffen, die von Kaufleuten aus China und Europa gleichermaßen anerkannt wird. Deshalb wird das CEAC das weltweit erste Schiedsgericht, das in seinen Gremien paritätisch besetzt ist. In der Geschäftsführung sitzt eine chinesische Rechtsprofessorin. Vorsitzender des Beirats ist der ehemalige Präsident der chinesischen Rechtsanwaltskammer, Gao Zongze aus Peking.

Mit dem neuen Schiedsgericht erhält der Handel mit China ein verlässliches rechtliches Fundament. Bisher sind Urteile europäischer Gerichte in China nämlich nicht vollstreckbar, gleiches gilt umgekehrt. Hingegen sind Urteile, die ein anerkanntes Schiedsgericht fällt, sofort vollstreckbar. Dazu haben sich die meisten Staaten, darunter China, im New Yorker Abkommen von 1958 verpflichtet.

Das Beispiel eines Hamburger Mittelständlers zeigt es: Das Unternehmen, das nicht genannt werden darf, weil Schiedssprüche vertraulich sind, hatte mit einem chinesischen Handelspartner einen Vertrag zur Lieferung von Batterien geschlossen. Doch einige Lieferungen waren schadhaft, und das Werk in China konnte die vereinbarte Liefermenge zudem nicht einhalten. Schließlich stand ein Streitwert von über fünf Millionen Euro im Raum. Ein normales deutsches Gericht hätte dem Unternehmen die Summe vielleicht zugesprochen, doch ob das Geld tatsächlich geflossen wäre, ist fraglich. Da die Handelspartner für den Streitfall aber ein Schiedsverfahren vereinbart hatten, wurde ein internationales Schiedsgericht angerufen. So kam das Hamburger Unternehmen doch noch zu seinem Geld.

Solche Fälle sollen künftig in Hamburg verhandelt werden, "Von den 250 Schiedsgerichten, die es weltweit gibt, ist keines speziell auf den chinesischen Markt zugeschnitten", sagt Rechtsanwalt Eckart Brödermann, Vorsitzender des Trägervereins Chinese European Legal Association. "Hier schließt das CEAC eine Lücke in den internationalen Handelsbeziehungen."

Anstoß zu dem Projekt habe die Reise von Bürgermeister Ole von Beust nach China vor vier Jahren gegeben. Er wurde vom damaligen Präsidenten der Hanseatischen Rechtsanwaltskammer, Axel C. Filges, begleitet, der die Chancen für ein Schiedsgericht zwischen Hamburg und seiner Partnerstadt Shanghai auslotete. "Inzwischen wurde das Interesse aber so groß, dass wir das Projekt auf ganz Europa und die Welt ausdehnen konnten", so Brödermann.

Mittlerweile sind viele namhafte internationale Wirtschaftsanwaltskanzleien wie Clifford Chance, Hengeler Mueller, Freshfields, CMS, DLA Piper und HJM Asia Law & Co Mitglied des Vereins. Außerdem haben sich 470 Unterstützer aus 47 Nationen gefunden. Der Verein ist offen für Kaufleute, Juristen und Institutionen mit Interesse am Rechts- und Kulturaustausch mit China.

Über den Standort des Schiedsgerichts gab es keinen Streit. Thomas Weimann, Partner bei Clifford Chance, einer führenden Anwaltssozietät auf dem asiatischen Markt, sagte: "Wir hätten das Schiedsgericht natürlich gern in Düsseldorf gehabt, aber Hamburg ist über den Handel eng mit China verbunden und hat außerdem eine lange Tradition als Standort für internationale Schiedsverfahren."”

The Article can be found under: http://www.welt.de/hamburg/article2419336/Internationales-Schiedsgericht-fuer-Hamburg.html.

Download as PDF

The rough office translation of this article into English by Brödermann & Jahn reads as follows:

- Office Translation -

“Hamburg obtains International Arbitration Court
New institution shall resolve disputes between merchants from China and other nations – ceremony at town Hall
from Martin Kopp

Hamburg obtains a further legal institution of world importance following the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. The Hanseatic Town will become the home of a Chinese European Arbitration Institution, which shall administer worldwide arbitrations between companies in China related matters.

The so called CEAC (Chinese European Arbitration Centre) will be inaugurated on 18 September 2008 with a ceremony at the Town Hall. Shareholder of the court is an association which was initiated by the Hamburg Bar Organisation, the Chamber of Commerce in Hamburg, the Tönissteiner Group as well as over 50 lawyers and law firms from 13 nations including Argentina, New Zealand, the United States and Indonesia. The Arbitration Centre will have its seat at Adolphsplatz 1 at the Chamber of Commerce.

It is the goal of the project to create a legal institution which will be recognized equally by merchants from China and Europe. Therefore, CEAC shall be the first arbitration institution in the world in which the power in the organs shall be divided. The management includes a Chinese Professor of Law. President of the Advisory Board is the former president of the Chinese Lawyers Association, Gao Zongze from Beijing.

Through the new Arbitration Institution, the trade with China receives a reliable legal basis. So far, judgements of European Courts are not enforceable in China, the same is true vice versa. In contrast, judgements rendered by a recognized arbitration tribunal, are enforceable. Most nations, including China, have undertaken to recognize enforcement in the New York Convention of 1958.

An example of a mid-sized Hamburg firm: The firm, which may not be mentioned, because arbitration awards are confidential, had concluded a contract regarding the delivery of batteries with a Chinese commercial partner. Yet, some of the deliveries had defects, and the production unit in China could not produce the amount of pieces agreed. As a result a dispute of an amount above € 5 Mio. arose. An ordinary German court might have awarded the sum, but it would have been doubtful, if the money would really have been paid. As the commercial partners had agreed up on arbitration in case of disputes, they turned to an international arbitration court. As a result, the Hamburg firm could obtain its money.

In the future such cases shall be resolved in Hamburg. "Out of the 250 Arbitration Institutions existing worldwide, none is tailored especially for the Chinese market", says Attorney at Law Eckart Brödermann, Chairman of the Shareholder Chinese European Legal Association. "In this respect CEAC fills a gap in international commercial relations."

The idea for the project was born on the occasion of a journey of the mayor Ole von Beust to China four years ago. He was accompanied by the former President of the Hamburg Bar Organisation, Axel C. Filges, who did sort out the chances for an Arbitration Institution between Hamburg and its sister city Shanghai. "Meanwhile the interest in the project had becomes so large that we have been able to extend the project to entire Europe and the world.", so says Brödermann.

Until now many well-known international commerce law firms have become member of the Association such as Clifford Chance, Hengeler Mueller, Freshfields, CMS, DLA Piper and HJM Asia Lawyers & Co. Moreover, there are 470 supporters from 47 Nations. The Association is open for merchants, lawyers and institutions within an interest in legal and cultural exchange with China.

With respect to the place of the Arbitration Institution, there was no dispute. Thomas Weimann, Partner of Clifford Chance, a leading law firm in the Asian market, says: "We would have loved to have the Arbitration Institution in Düsseldorf, but through its trade, Hamburg is closely connected with China and, moreover, it has a long tradition as place for international arbitrations."

Download as PDF

Chinese version as PDF

Furthermore, “Die Welt” also mentioned the Chinese European Arbitration Centre in an article published on 14 September 2008 headed "China ist in Hamburg laengst zu Hause" in the Hamburg edition, page 1 which can be found under:
http://www.welt.de/hamburg/article2440181/China-ist-in-Hamburg-schon-laengst-zu-Hause.html.

In addition, further newspapers and digital media published articles regarding the Chinese European Arbitration Centre:

The journal „Betriebsberater“ published an article under the heading „Chinesisch-Europäisches Schiedsgerichtszentrum in Hamburg“ which reads:

Chinesisch-Europäisches Schiedsgerichtszentrum in Hamburg

-ur- Am 18.9. wird in Hamburg das Chinesisch- Europäische Schiedsgerichtszentrum (CEAC) eröffnet. Dieses wird künftig weltweit Schiedsverfahren mit Bezug auf China betreuen. Es entstand auf Initiative der Hanseatischen Rechtsanwaltskammer, der Handelskammer Hamburg und rund 50 international tätigen Anwaltskanzleien und Anwälten aus 13 Staaten.
 
Eine Notwendigkeit für ein Schiedsgericht sehen die Initiatoren darin, dass der Handel mit China sehr intensiv sei, zugleich aber staatliche Gerichte die erforderliche Rechtssicherheit nicht bieten könnten, weil Urteile aus einem Staat in Europa nicht verlässlich in China vollstreckt werden könnten und umgekehrt. Im Gegensatz zu anderen Schiedsgerichtszentren zeichnet sich das speziell auf China zugeschnittene Projekt dadurch aus, dass in allen Gremien, die über die Verteilung von Schiedsgerichtsmandaten zu entscheiden haben, zu gleichen Teilen Chinesen, Europäer und Spezialisten aus anderen Regionen der Welt vertreten sind. Dies spiegelt sich bereits in der Besetzung des Vorstandsvorsitzes des Trägervereins durch einen Deutschen und des Vorsitzenden des Beirats des Trägervereins durch einen Chinesen wider. Dem Vorstand des Trägervereins gehören die Rechtsanwälte Dr. Eckart Brödermann (Hamburg), Thomas Weimann (Düsseldorf), Dr. Volker Meinberg (Hamburg) und Dr. Cornelius Pöhner (Hamburg) an. Dem international besetzten Beirat steht der ehemalige Präsident der All China Lawyers Association und der Interpacific Bar Association, Zongze Gao (Peking), vor.
 
(Quelle: PM Hanseatische Rechtsanwaltskammer vom 10.9.2008)“

This article can be found under:
http://www.betriebs-berater.de/magazin/pages/show.phptimer=1221239072&deph=0&id=50890&currPage=1.

An article published on taz.de from 10 September 2008 can be found under:
https://www.taz.de/1/archiv/print-archiv/printressorts/digi-artikel/?ressort=ha&dig=20082F092F102Fa0176&cHash=8fae6eaaef.

The article from Hamburg 1 can be found under:
http://www.hamburg1.de/hh1/nachrichten_article.html?nachrichten/2008/09/09/1295300000.

In December 2007 the co-initiating law firm Brödermann & Jahn (Hamburg, Germany, www.german-law.com) dedicated Chapter II of its annual booklet “Business Law” (7th  edition 2008, page 35 ed. seq.) to the CEAC project:

“Chapter II: The impact of globalisation on China related commercial arbitration - The creation of a Chinese European Arbitration Centre in Hamburg, Germany

– by Dr. Eckart Brödermann *

* Dr. Brödermann is Member of the Board of the Hamburg Bar Organisation which is the initiator of the project of a Chinese European Arbitration Centre in Hamburg. The views expressed hereinafter are his personal views.

I. Introduction: The time is ripe!

Globalisation is shaping trade and legal relations worldwide. Chinese companies take an active part in international trade. They use the up-sides of globalisation and increasingly invest in companies or business ventures in Europe and worldwide.

Important parts of the Chinese-European business is rooted via the port of Hamburg, the sister city of Shanghai. The trade volume between China and Germany alone amounts to round about 75 billion € (in 2006).

Where trade takes place, disputes arise. Already in 1987, a Beijing Hamburg Conciliation Centre was created which is today hosted by the Hamburg Chamber of Commerce: At that time the creation of such a Centre may have been still somewhat visionary. The Chinese international economy was still slowly waking up. This has changed. The time is ripe to adapt the existing China-tailored dispute mechanism to the needs of today.

II. Initiation of the Project

The idea of the project of a Chinese European Arbitration Centre that shall be interconnected with the existing Beijing Hamburg Conciliation Centre goes back to 2004. At that time, the Hamburg Bar Organisation had already concluded a Cooperation Agreement with the Tianjin Bar Association. The question came up what it could do to enhance the relations with the sister city Chapter II – The Chinese European Arbitration Centre of Hamburg, Shanghai. However, first bilateral discussions in Shanghai at the occasion of a Conference of World City Bar Leaders showed that a broader view of the picture was necessary. As a result, the project became slowly national, then European and finally global.

In 2007, after a number of first meetings on a regional level in Hamburg, numerous face-to-face discussions took place, in particular at the occasion of international conferences or working sessions organised by the Inter Pacific Bar Organisation in Beijing (including some follow-up meetings in Shanghai), by Unidroit in Rome, by UNCITRAL in Vienna, by the International Bar Association in Singapore, and by the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation in Moscow.

Particularly noteworthy are the very first international caucuses in Beijing including representatives of CIETAC in April 2007, in which the acceptability of the project^from a Chinese perspective was discussed, and the kick-off meeting at a luncheon with 32 experts from 17 countries hosted by the Hamburg Bar Organisation at the Singapore Cricket Club on 15th October 2007.

III. Reasons

Based on numerous discussions with lawyers from around the globe, the following reasons support the creation of a Chinese European Arbitration Centre:

• As mentioned, Chinese trade has become global (and at least much more international than it was 20 years ago). In global trade, business players require global answers. This includes options for dispute resolution both in China and outside of China: When foreign companies invest in China, it may be appropriate to agree on arbitration in China. However, when Chinese companies come to Europe or other parts of the world and need business partners there, it will usually not be possible to make these agree on arbitration in China. Further, it is often wise and a good tradition to agree on arbitration on neutral ground. Thereby, the Chinese European Arbitration Centre can be an interesting option for trade between Chinese and non-German (e.g. Spanish or South American) companies.

There are, of course, a large number of qualified options to arbitrate outside China irrespective of the creation of the Chinese European Arbitration Centre, e.g. in Cologne, Frankfurt, Milan, Paris, Stockholm, Vienna, Zurich. Yet, the Chinese European Arbitration Centre goes one step further and adapts the rules specifically to the needs of the China trade (see below IV.)

• The Chinese European Arbitration Centre supplements the existing Hamburg Beijing Conciliation Centre. Thus, the possibilities of conciliation and arbitration can be combined.
• The Chinese European Arbitration Centre will be founded on the basis of a long existing tradition of dispute settlement in Hamburg. With about 230 arbitrations per year (estimate of the Hamburg Chamber of Commerce), Hamburg is a well-known centre for arbitration.
• The German arbitration law is based on the UNCITRAL Model Arbitration Law. Germany and China are both parties to the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. As a result, the law which governs arbitrations in Hamburg (in addition to the contractual agreements of the parties and the rules of the Chinese European Arbitration Centre, if chosen) is modern and state of the art. It is calculable to Chinese lawyers.

To sum up: Why not arbitrate under the Hamburg Arbitration Rules and/or in a city – Hamburg – which, is the European home of approximately 400 Chinese companies and which, by its trade, is in fact related so closely to China? ^

In this context, it is noteworthy that the German Federal Ministry of Justice has issued on 20 September 2007 a regulation which provides the basis for the admission of Chinese lawyers to act as legal counsel in Germany (BGBl. 2007 I 2302). Thereby, Chinese lawyers will be able to act before arbitration tribunals in Germany.

IV. “UNCITRAL plus”

The rules of the future Chinese European Arbitration Centre in Hamburg are presently in discussion. Based on the status of discussion at the time of this writing the concept can be summarised as follows:

• The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules are common ground between China and Europe. They should not be changed. There are aspects, which the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules in their present version do not cover such as multi-party-arbitrations. UNCITRAL is working itself on a revision of the rules. For the time being, such adaptations will be left to the parties, if they so wish. Later, a joint drafting committee may adapt the rules in a joint effort, if that is deemed wise. At this stage, in general there is no desire to amend the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules.
• As the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules have been initially conceived for ad hoc arbitrations (as opposed to institutional arbitration which a number of Chinese law experts suggest for the project), some supplementary rules are necessary in view of the nature of the project. For example, the Chinese European Arbitration Centre will need to receive a copy of the briefs in order to perform its function. Its appointing authority (Arbitration Commission) will take the place of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague, to which the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules refer. Such supplements shall be put in an Addendum containing a minimum of “Additional Rules”. They will be further discussed with representatives of UNCITRAL supporting the project and they will be enacted in close liaison with them.  
• Quite often, international contracts for various reasons contain no choice of law clause or unclear choice of law clauses referring, e.g. to “international commercial law.” In such cases, the Additional Rules will provide that truly neutral rules shall be applicable:
  
  
• the United Nations (Vienna) Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), to sales contracts,
• and otherwise the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts.

These rules are accepted in China and in most European countries.

V. A truly international venture

Using the possibilities of global conferences and global communication, the project has integrated lawyers from around the globe at the earliest stage possible. At the time of this writing the project has received the support of more than 250 international experts including representatives of renowned institutions such as UNCITRAL, Unidroit and various committees of the International Bar Association. The common ground is the belief that the reasons mentioned at III. are valid.

The project integrates not only outside counsels. It thrives to be attractive also to in-house counsels and business men.

VI. Commitment

The creation of such an arbitration centre is a commitment of both the City of Hamburg and the Hamburg Bar Organisation. Their commitment is in line with the Hamburg-Chinese tradition as documented by the fact that Hamburg has become the sister city of Shanghai.”

Download as PDF
Download Chinese Version as PDF