Delta Law Expat Services Desk ｜ Supreme People's Court 最高人民法院, third mediation batch released 2026-04-16
- Case name 案例名称：也门籍商人哈某与广州某公司买卖合同纠纷案 (sale of goods dispute between a Yemeni businessman and a Guangzhou company)
- Case number 案例编号：最高人民法院《第三批涉外商事海事调解典型案例》案例四，2026 年 4 月 16 日发布
- Effective judgment 生效裁判：官方发布文本未载明案号；官方载明受理法院为广东自由贸易试验区南沙片区人民法院，以调解结案
- Keywords 关键词：官方发布文本未单设关键词栏；官方案例标题载明「“促、评、鉴”并行，“双调解”巧解跨国商事纠纷」
- Provisions cited officially 官方载明的相关法条：官方发布文本未载明条号
- Why this case 为什么选它：『机器做出来了，我到厂验收，发现压缩机牌子跟合同上写的不是一个——我人在国外，这场架要怎么打？』外籍买家在中国采购设备，卡点几乎都在验收和举证这两步。
1. The facts as officially published 基本案情
2022年6月，也门籍商人哈某向广州某公司订购一台总价25余万美元、重达30吨的实心管式制冰机，双方在合同中明确约定压缩机、电磁阀、膨胀阀等关键部件的品牌型号，以及制冰规格、产能、能耗等核心技术参数。设备生产完成后，哈某在验收环节发现部分部件品牌型号、设备运行参数与合同约定内容不符，随即拒绝收货并提出退款要求；广州某公司则认为产品符合合同约定，要求哈某继续履行付款与提货义务，双方就此产生激烈争议。哈某向广东自由贸易试验区南沙片区人民法院提起诉讼，请求解除涉案买卖合同，判令广州某公司双倍返还定金、退还已支付货款并赔偿相应损失；广州某公司提起反诉，请求继续履行合同，判令哈某支付剩余货款并承担违约责任。
In 2022-06 a Yemeni businessman ordered a solid tube ice machine of over USD 250,000 in price and 30 tonnes in weight from a Guangzhou company. The contract expressly specified the brands and models of key components including the compressor, solenoid valve and expansion valve, together with core technical parameters such as ice specification, output and energy consumption. After manufacture, the buyer found at acceptance that some component brands and models and some operating parameters did not match the contract, refused delivery and sought a refund; the seller maintained the goods conformed and demanded payment and collection. The buyer sued in the Nansha Area People's Court of the Guangdong Pilot Free Trade Zone for rescission, double return of the deposit, refund of sums paid and damages; the seller counterclaimed for performance, the balance of the price and damages for breach.
Unofficial translation; the Chinese text as officially published prevails.
The single most useful fact in that paragraph is not the amount or the tonnage. It is that the contract named the brands and models of the compressor, solenoid valve and expansion valve, and set out ice specification, output and energy consumption. Those written specifications are what turned a disagreement about quality into a question that could be tested. Without them there is nothing for an appraiser to compare the machine against, and a dispute of this kind collapses into competing assertions.
The second useful fact is the shape of the litigation: claim and counterclaim in the same court. A foreign buyer who sues in China for rescission should assume the seller will counterclaim for the balance of the price in the same proceedings, and should be ready to defend that counterclaim from day one rather than treating it as a later problem.
2. The official holding 裁判要旨（官方原文）
一是以“鉴”明事实，夯实调解基础。针对制冰机部件规格、技术参数等专业问题，人民法院依法启动司法鉴定程序，委托专业机构出具权威鉴定意见，并组织鉴定人员出庭接受询问，充分保障双方质证权利。以中立专业意见固定事实、明晰是非，消除当事人因事实认知差异产生的对立情绪，为调解工作创造基础。二是以“促”通理念，破除跨境沟通障碍。选派熟悉中国和也门两国国情、长期从事外贸生意的也门籍调解员，以阿拉伯语开展沟通，向也门籍当事人细致阐释中国司法程序与调解规则，消除其对纠纷解决机制的认知偏差与信任顾虑。
First, appraisal to establish the facts: on the technical questions of component specifications and parameters the court commenced a judicial appraisal, instructed a professional body to give an opinion, and had the appraiser attend court for questioning so that both sides could test the evidence. Second, communication: a Yemeni mediator familiar with both countries and experienced in foreign trade was appointed to communicate in Arabic and to explain Chinese court procedure and mediation rules to the foreign party.
Unofficial translation; the Chinese text as officially published prevails.
在中外调解员联动协作下，人民法院组织双方多次磋商，逐步缩小分歧，最终自愿达成调解协议，并于协议签订次日全面主动履行完毕，纠纷得以实质化解，取得案结事了的良好效果。
本案创新推行“促、评、鉴”并行、“双调解”融合工作机制，以鉴定明事实、以促进通理念、以评估定利弊，有效破解涉外商事纠纷中语言不通、文化差异、事实认定难、预期差距大等突出问题……
With the two mediators working together the parties narrowed their differences over several rounds and reached a voluntary settlement, performed in full the day after signing. The published note describes the mechanism as combining facilitation, evaluation and appraisal, with a dual-mediator structure, to address language, cultural difference, difficulty of fact-finding and gaps in expectation.
Unofficial translation; the Chinese text as officially published prevails.
Note what the official release does not record. It does not state the settlement figure, and it does not state how the claim for double return of the deposit was resolved. That claim was made and the matter settled; nothing in the published text addresses its merits, and it would be wrong to read the outcome as authority on deposits either way.
Two structural points are worth drawing out of the mediation description. The first is that an appraisal is not the end of the evidential process but the beginning of a testable one. The published account records the appraiser being brought to court for questioning; that step is what converts an expert report from a document into evidence the parties have actually probed. A foreign buyer should prepare for it in advance — questions about sampling, about which contract clause the appraiser treated as the benchmark, and about what was and was not examined tend to matter more than the headline conclusion.
The second is about language. It is easy to treat interpretation as an administrative detail and then discover, mid-proceedings, that the case turns on a technical vocabulary nobody has translated consistently. Component names, tolerances and units all need a settled bilingual glossary before the appraisal starts, and it is far cheaper to agree one with the other side than to argue about it afterwards.
Finally, a word on timing. Acceptance is the moment at which a buyer's position is either preserved or lost. Photograph the nameplates, record serial numbers, keep the inspection record, and put the objection in writing to the seller on the day. None of that requires a lawyer, and all of it is difficult to reconstruct later.
3. Practical guidance 律师实务提示
Expect the counterclaim, and understand why it lands in the same court. 《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第二百七十六条 is the head that would ground a Chinese court's jurisdiction over a principal claim against a defendant without domicile in China, and it lists the connecting factors: the place of contracting, the place of performance, the location of the subject matter, the location of attachable property, the place of the tort, and the domicile of a representative office, plus a residual head where the dispute has another appropriate connection with China. A counterclaim is different: it is heard by the court already seised of the principal action, so no separate connecting factor has to be established for it. The practical consequence for a foreign buyer is that choosing to sue in China also places you before that court as a counterclaim defendant.
Fix your service address before the dispute starts. 《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第二百八十三条 sets out ten methods of serving a party without domicile in China, including electronic methods where the receiving state's law does not prohibit them, and postal service that is deemed effective three months after posting if the receipt is not returned but the circumstances show delivery; public notice takes effect sixty days after issue. If you never see the papers because they went to a stale address, those deeming rules still run.
Plan the evidence that sits abroad. 《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第二百八十四条 allows evidence located outside China to be collected through treaty or diplomatic routes, and — where the law of the place does not prohibit it — through a Chinese consular post for Chinese nationals, through instant-messaging tools with both parties' consent, or by other agreed methods. Consent-based routes are much faster, so raise them early.
One drafting action, worth more than all three. Write the brand, model and measurable parameters into the contract, as the parties did 本案 —「双方在合同中明确约定压缩机、电磁阀、膨胀阀等关键部件的品牌型号」. That is what gives an appraiser something to measure against.
4. What this means in your situation 把要点落到你的处境
第二百七十六条 因涉外民事纠纷，对在中华人民共和国领域内没有住所的被告提起除身份关系以外的诉讼，如果合同签订地、合同履行地、诉讼标的物所在地、可供扣押财产所在地、侵权行为地、代表机构住所地位于中华人民共和国领域内的，可以由合同签订地、合同履行地、诉讼标的物所在地、可供扣押财产所在地、侵权行为地、代表机构住所地人民法院管辖。
第二百八十四条 当事人申请人民法院调查收集的证据位于中华人民共和国领域外，人民法院可以依照证据所在国与中华人民共和国缔结或者共同参加的国际条约中规定的方式，或者通过外交途径调查收集。
Article 276: in a foreign-related civil dispute, an action other than one concerning personal status brought against a defendant without domicile in China may be heard by the court of the place of contracting, of performance, of the subject matter, of attachable property, of the tort, or of a representative office, where that place is in China. Article 284: where evidence a party asks the court to collect is located outside China, the court may collect it in the manner provided by a treaty to which the state where the evidence is located and China are parties, or through diplomatic routes.
Unofficial translation; the Chinese text as officially published prevails.
| What the official release holds | What it controls procedurally | What it means for you |
|---|---|---|
| Judicial appraisal was commenced on the technical questions | How disputed specifications become findable facts | Contract specifications are the appraiser's benchmark; write them in |
| The appraiser attended court for questioning | The right to test expert evidence | Prepare questions on method and sampling, not only on conclusions |
| A mediator communicating in the party's own language was appointed | How the foreign party participates | Ask early about language arrangements rather than assuming interpretation |
| Claim and counterclaim ran together | The scope of the proceedings | Budget for defending the price claim from the outset |
- Misconception: a foreign buyer cannot get an independent technical assessment in a Chinese court. In fact: the official release records that in 本案 the court 「依法启动司法鉴定程序，委托专业机构出具权威鉴定意见」.
- Misconception: an appraisal report cannot be challenged once filed. In fact: the official release records that 该案 the court 「组织鉴定人员出庭接受询问，充分保障双方质证权利」.
- Misconception: rejecting delivery ends the buyer's exposure. In fact: the official 基本案情 records that in 本案 the seller 「提起反诉，请求继续履行合同」.
- Misconception: this case shows a buyer can always recover double the deposit. In fact: the official release does not state how that claim was resolved; it records only a voluntary settlement performed the day after signing.
- ① 最高人民法院《第三批涉外商事海事调解典型案例》案例四《也门籍商人哈某与广州某公司买卖合同纠纷案》，最高人民法院新闻局 2026 年 4 月 16 日发布，官方页 https://www.court.gov.cn/zixun/xiangqing/497661.html 。
- ② 生效裁判：官方发布文本未载明案号。
- ③ 本页引用：《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第二百七十六条、第二百八十三条、第二百八十四条，依《全国人民代表大会常务委员会关于修改〈中华人民共和国民事诉讼法〉的决定》（2023 年 9 月 1 日通过，自 2024 年 1 月 1 日起施行）修改或增加，现行有效，官方页 http://www.npc.gov.cn/npc/c2/c30834/202309/t20230901_431419.html 。
- Status and timing note 效力与时点提示：本案为最高人民法院发布的调解典型案例，供审判参考，不具有指导性案例的参照效力；in English, it is published for reference and does not carry the effect of a guiding case. 官方发布文本未载明所适用的条号；本页所引《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》三条系官方发布文本未涉及的现行规则，仅作程序路径提示，不是本案的裁判依据。官方发布文本未载明调解金额，亦未载明双倍返还定金请求的处理结果，本页未作补写。程序性事项 subject to the current published requirements of the accepting authority。
- 本页案例引自官方公开发布，非本所承办案件展示，不构成对具体个案的法律意见。This case is drawn from an official public release and is not a showcase of matters handled by this firm, and does not constitute legal advice on any specific case.
This article is general legal research and does not constitute legal advice; by law, a law firm may not guarantee case outcomes. 本文为一般性法律研究，不构成法律意见；依据法律规定，律所不得承诺办案结果。
