Delta Law Expat Services Desk ｜ Supreme People's Court 最高人民法院, typical case batch released 2025-08-07
- Case name 案例名称：乌兹别克斯坦阿某与开某买卖合同纠纷案 (sale of goods dispute between an Uzbek trader and a Chinese trader)
- Case number 案例编号：最高人民法院《第二批涉外商事海事调解典型案例》案例五，2025 年 8 月 7 日发布，本批共 6 件
- 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新疆维吾尔自治区乌鲁木齐市新市区人民法院
- Keywords 关键词：官方案例标题载明「乌兹别克斯坦当事人足不出户追索货款」
- Provisions cited officially 官方载明的相关法条：官方发布文本未载明任何条号；本页所引条号均为现行规则提示
- Why this case 为什么选它：The two costs that stop foreign claimants from suing in China are the notarisation-and-legalisation chain for a power of attorney and the price of attending in person. This published case shows both being cut, and the legal limits of the route that did it.
1. The facts as officially published 基本案情
2023年5月，乌兹别克斯坦商人阿某通过中间人巴某介绍，向我国商人开某供应一批价值108500元人民币的钢丝。货物经跨境运输抵达乌鲁木齐市后，开某称因物流环节出现问题，货物丢失，一直未向阿某支付货款。2023年12月，阿某前往乌鲁木齐市追讨货款。12月28日，开某向阿某出具用维吾尔语打印的《还款协议》，并在协议上签字、捺印。2025年4月2日，阿某向新疆维吾尔自治区乌鲁木齐市新市区人民法院（以下简称新市区法院）提起诉讼，请求法院判令开某向其支付货款108500元并支付违约金、交通费、住宿费、律师代理费等。
In 2023-05 an Uzbek trader, introduced by an intermediary, supplied a Chinese trader with a consignment of steel wire valued at RMB 108,500. After the goods reached Urumqi by cross-border transport, the Chinese trader said the goods had been lost through a logistics problem and did not pay the price. In 2023-12 the Uzbek trader travelled to Urumqi to pursue payment. On 2023-12-28 the Chinese trader issued to the Uzbek trader a repayment agreement printed in the Uyghur language and signed and fingerprinted it. On 2025-04-02 the Uzbek trader sued in the Xinshi District People's Court of Urumqi, Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, seeking an order for payment of the price of RMB 108,500 together with liquidated damages, travel costs, accommodation costs and legal representation costs.
Unofficial translation; the Chinese text as officially published prevails.
Two features of this file are worth pausing on. The claim is small — RMB 108,500 of principal — and the sequence is slow: goods in 2023-05, a trip to China in 2023-12, a signed repayment agreement on 2023-12-28, and proceedings only on 2025-04-02. On those numbers, a conventional cross-border claim would spend a meaningful share of the principal on travel and on authenticating documents before the merits were reached.
The second feature is the repayment agreement. It converted a disputed sale into an acknowledged debt, signed and fingerprinted by the debtor. That document was obtained during the trip the claimant did make. With a debt acknowledged in writing, what remains in issue is payment rather than the reconstruction of a lost consignment.
2. The official holding 裁判要旨（官方原文）
一是以便利高效诉讼服务开启双方对话。跨境诉讼程序繁琐、耗时长、成本高是阻碍国际商事纠纷解决的突出问题。本案依托数字化法庭建设成果，通过视频见证委托和线上调解的方式，为乌兹别克斯坦当事人节省公证、认证以及出庭的时间及费用。二是以专业调解能力促成纠纷实质性化解。为准确厘清双方争点，人民法院选派通晓乌兹别克语的干警全程参与调解。针对双方分歧，法官通过“争议分层处置法”将诉求与抗辩拆解重构，先锁定双方无争议的货款金额，再针对有争议的诉求逐一化解，以专业能力促成圆满调解。
First, opening a dialogue through convenient and efficient litigation services. Cumbersome procedure, long timescales and high cost in cross-border litigation are prominent obstacles to resolving international commercial disputes. Relying on the digital court infrastructure, the case used video-witnessed authorisation and online mediation, saving the Uzbek party the time and cost of notarisation, legalisation and attendance in court. Second, achieving substantive resolution through professional mediation capacity. To identify the issues precisely, the court assigned officers proficient in Uzbek to take part in the mediation throughout. Applying a layered treatment of the dispute, the judge disaggregated and restructured the claims and defences, first fixing the amount of the price that was not in dispute and then resolving the contested claims one by one.
Unofficial translation; the Chinese text as officially published prevails.
Read the layered method as a negotiating structure rather than as a courtesy. The undisputed principal was settled first; the arguable items — liquidated damages, travel, accommodation and legal costs — were dealt with afterwards, one at a time. A claimant who bundles everything into a single figure invites a single global discount; a claimant who separates the two categories protects the part nobody actually disputes.
最终双方达成调解协议，阿某同意降低违约金诉求金额，开某承诺分期履行货款，双方均表示愿意继续保持贸易合作关系。
本案中，人民法院创新运用“多语言协同+数字化赋能+争议分层处置”的矛盾纠纷多元化解机制，充分发挥法院本土资源优势，积极利用科技法庭建设最新成果，通过视频见证委托和线上调解的方式，不仅让外方当事人节省了公证、认证的时间及费用，而且促使双方当事人“足不出户”就化解相隔千里的纠纷。
The parties reached a mediation agreement under which the Uzbek trader agreed to reduce the amount claimed as liquidated damages and the Chinese trader undertook to pay the price by instalments, both saying they wished to continue their trading relationship. The published note records the court as combining multilingual coordination, digital enablement and layered treatment of the dispute, and as using video-witnessed authorisation and online mediation to save the foreign party the time and cost of notarisation and legalisation and to resolve a dispute across a great distance without the parties having to leave home.
Unofficial translation; the Chinese text as officially published prevails.
The trade-off in the outcome is explicit: a reduction on the liquidated damages in exchange for instalments on the principal. That is a common shape for a settlement with a counterparty who is short of cash rather than unwilling, and it puts the claimant's real risk on the instalment schedule — which is where the drafting effort should go.
3. Practical guidance 律师实务提示
Know exactly which requirement the remote route avoids. 《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第二百七十五条 attaches its notarisation and consular legalisation requirement — or the treaty procedure in its place — to a power of attorney sent or entrusted from outside China by a party without a domicile in China. By its terms the provision addresses a power of attorney sent or entrusted from outside China; on its face it does not speak to an authorisation created in front of the court. That is a reading of the words of article 275 and nothing more — it is not a general substitute, and what follows for any particular case is a matter for the court concerned: the official release does not record the instrument on which the practice rests, and whether a particular court will accommodate it is a matter for that court.
Get the debt acknowledged while you are in the country. The language of the acknowledgement matters less than the signature. A document signed and fingerprinted by the debtor converts an evidential problem about goods into a payment claim, and it is the cheapest thing to obtain during a visit you are making anyway.
Do not assume the court will supply your language. 《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第二百七十三条 provides that proceedings are conducted in the language commonly used in China and that translation, if requested, may be provided at the party's expense. Where a court is able to assign officers who speak your language, that is a convenience of the forum rather than an entitlement you can insist on. Budget for interpretation and for translated documents, and treat any assistance as a saving rather than a plan.
Finally, plan the representation. 《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第二百七十四条 requires a foreign party who needs a lawyer in Chinese proceedings to instruct a lawyer of China. Separate the undisputed principal from the contested add-ons before mediation begins, and settle them in that order.
4. What this means in your situation 把要点落到你的处境
第二百七十三条 人民法院审理涉外民事案件，应当使用中华人民共和国通用的语言、文字。当事人要求提供翻译的，可以提供，费用由当事人承担。
第二百七十四条 外国人、无国籍人、外国企业和组织在人民法院起诉、应诉，需要委托律师代理诉讼的，必须委托中华人民共和国的律师。
第二百七十五条 在中华人民共和国领域内没有住所的外国人、无国籍人、外国企业和组织委托中华人民共和国律师或者其他人代理诉讼，从中华人民共和国领域外寄交或者托交的授权委托书，应当经所在国公证机关证明，并经中华人民共和国驻该国使领馆认证，或者履行中华人民共和国与该所在国订立的有关条约中规定的证明手续后，才具有效力。
Article 273: in hearing foreign-related civil cases the people's courts shall use the language and characters commonly used in China; where a party requests translation, it may be provided, at that party's expense. Article 274: where a foreign national, stateless person, foreign enterprise or organisation needs to instruct a lawyer to act in proceedings before a people's court, it must instruct a lawyer of China. Article 275: where a foreign national, stateless person, foreign enterprise or organisation without a domicile in China instructs a lawyer of China or another person to act in proceedings, a power of attorney sent or entrusted from outside China takes effect only after being certified by a notarial organ of the country concerned and authenticated by the Chinese embassy or consulate in that country, or after completion of the certification procedures provided in the relevant treaty concluded between China and that country.
Unofficial translation; the Chinese text as officially published prevails.
| What the official release records | What it turns on | What it means for you |
|---|---|---|
| Video-witnessed authorisation and online mediation used | How the power of attorney was created | Ask the receiving court early whether it can accommodate the route; do not assume it |
| Notarisation, legalisation and attendance costs saved | Cost as a barrier to small claims | Compare the authentication chain against the claim value before choosing a route |
| A repayment agreement signed and fingerprinted by the debtor | An acknowledged debt, not a goods dispute | Convert the dispute into a written acknowledgement while you are in the country |
| Court officers proficient in the party's language assigned | A convenience of the forum | Budget for interpretation anyway; treat assistance as a saving |
| Undisputed price fixed first, contested items resolved one by one | Order of negotiation | Separate principal from add-ons before mediation begins |
| Reduced liquidated damages against payment by instalments | Cash flow of the counterparty | Put the drafting effort into the instalment schedule and default terms |
- Misconception: you must attend a Chinese court in person to bring a claim. In fact: the official 调解方法及结果 records that in 本案 the court used 「视频见证委托和线上调解的方式」 and the official 典型意义 records the dispute being resolved 「“足不出户”」.
- Misconception: a document in a language other than Chinese cannot support a claim. In fact: the official 基本案情 records that in 该案 the debtor issued 「用维吾尔语打印的《还款协议》」 and signed and fingerprinted it.
- Misconception: the court will always provide someone who speaks your language. In fact: the official text records only that in 本案 the court 「选派通晓乌兹别克语的干警全程参与调解」; the statutory position on translation is set out in section 4 above.
- Misconception: settling means giving up the principal. In fact: the official 调解方法及结果 records that in 该案 the court 「先锁定双方无争议的货款金额」 before turning to the contested claims.
- The Chinese rules that apply to you
- Published cases involving foreign nationals
- Legal services for foreign nationals in China
- A Contract That Lived Only in WeChat: How a Bangladeshi Buyer Got the Money Back in Nanning (forthcoming in this batch)
- Apostille, Three Years On: What Still Cannot Take the Single-Step Route into China (pending publication)
- ① 最高人民法院《第二批涉外商事海事调解典型案例》案例五《乌兹别克斯坦阿某与开某买卖合同纠纷案》，2025 年 8 月 7 日发布，本批共 6 件，官方页 https://www.court.gov.cn/zixun/xiangqing/473101.html 。
- ② 生效裁判：官方发布文本未载明案号；官方载明受理法院为新疆维吾尔自治区乌鲁木齐市新市区人民法院，当事人只写「乌兹别克斯坦商人阿某」「我国商人开某」「中间人巴某」，本页照录。官方未载阿某的所在城市与性别，本页不补。
- ③ 本页引用《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第二百七十三条、第二百七十四条、第二百七十五条。三条均为官方发布文本未涉及的现行规则，本页仅作提示，不是本案的裁判依据。依 2023 年 9 月 1 日通过、2024 年 1 月 1 日施行的修正合并本，官方页 http://gongbao.court.gov.cn/Details/886331ece0f6611a370642e89f08c6.html 。
- ④ 关于视频见证委托：官方发布文本载明该做法，但未载明其规范依据的文号。本页据此只就上述第二百七十五条的文本射程作分析，不引未取得官方全文页的其他文件，不给出替代公证认证的条件清单。
- Status and timing note 效力与时点提示：本案为最高人民法院发布的典型案例，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任何条号，本页所引条号一律为现行规则提示。官方标题中的「足不出户」系就诉讼阶段而言；官方同时载明 2023 年 12 月当事人曾前往乌鲁木齐市追讨货款，本页两者并载。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。
