港澳法视界｜香港法律制度介绍（四）—— 香港与内地的判决互认与执行：跨越法域的司法协作

（香港中环 摄影：李哲凡）

判决的相互认可与执行是两地司法协助的重要组成部分，对于促进两地经济融合、保障当事人权益意义深远。从经济层面来看，随着内地与香港在贸易、投资、金融等领域合作的不断深化，大量民商事纠纷随之产生。若一方当事人在内地或香港法院获得胜诉判决，却无法在另一地得到认可和执行，那么司法判决将成为一纸空文，当事人的合法权益得不到保障，这无疑会极大地增加交易成本，削弱市场主体的信心，阻碍两地经济交流与合作的进一步发展。例如，内地某企业向香港某公司供应货物，双方因货款支付问题产生纠纷，内地企业在内地法院胜诉，但香港公司在内地无财产可供执行，其主要资产在香港。若没有判决互认与执行机制，内地企业的债权将难以实现，不仅自身利益受损，也会对后续内地企业与香港企业的贸易往来产生负面影响。

The mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments are important components of judicial assistance between the two regions, and have profound significance in promoting economic integration and safeguarding the rights and interests of the parties involved. From an economic perspective, with the continuous deepening of cooperation between the mainland and Hong Kong in trade, investment, finance and other fields, a large number of civil and commercial disputes have emerged. If one party wins a judgment in a mainland or Hong Kong court but cannot be recognized and enforced in another place, the judicial judgment will become a piece of paper, and the legitimate rights and interests of the parties will not be protected. This will undoubtedly greatly increase transaction costs, weaken the confidence of market entities, and hinder further development of economic exchanges and cooperation between the two places. For example, a mainland enterprise supplied goods to a Hong Kong company, and a dispute arose over payment of the goods. The mainland enterprise won the lawsuit in the mainland court, but the Hong Kong company had no property available for enforcement in mainland China and its main assets were in Hong Kong. If there is no mechanism for mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments, the creditor's rights of mainland enterprises will be difficult to realize, which will not only damage their own interests, but also have a negative impact on the subsequent trade exchanges between mainland enterprises and Hong Kong enterprises.

从社会层面而言，判决互认与执行关乎司法权威与公信力。当当事人选择通过司法途径解决纠纷时，他们期望得到公正的裁决，并相信裁决能够得到有效执行。如果不同法域之间不能实现判决的有效互认与执行，当事人会对司法制度感到失望，进而可能寻求其他非正规途径解决纠纷，这不利于社会秩序的稳定与法治环境的构建。

From a societal perspective, mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments are related to judicial authority and credibility. When parties choose to resolve disputes through judicial channels, they expect to receive fair rulings and believe that the rulings can be effectively enforced. If effective mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments cannot be achieved between different jurisdictions, the parties may feel disappointed with the judicial system and may seek other informal ways to resolve disputes, which is not conducive to the stability of social order and the construction of a legal environment.

在香港回归初期，内地与香港之间缺乏系统的判决互认与执行机制。当事人若想在对方地区执行判决，往往需要重新提起诉讼，这无疑增加了当事人的时间和经济成本，也造成了司法资源的浪费。为了解决这一问题，两地开始了初步探索。1999年，最高人民法院与香港特别行政区政府达成了《关于内地与香港特别行政区法院相互委托送达民商事司法文书的安排》，开启了两地司法协助的先河。此后，又陆续在仲裁裁决执行等方面达成合作，但在民商事判决互认与执行方面进展相对缓慢。

In the early stages of Hong Kong's return, there was a lack of a systematic mechanism for mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments between the mainland and Hong Kong. If the parties want to enforce the judgment in the other party's region, they often need to file a new lawsuit, which undoubtedly increases their time and economic costs, and also causes a waste of judicial resources. In order to solve this problem, the two places have started preliminary exploration. In 1999, the Supreme People's Court and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government reached an agreement on the "Arrangement for Mutual Commissioned Service of Civil and Commercial Judicial Documents by Mainland and Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Courts", marking the beginning of judicial assistance between the two regions. Since then, cooperation has been reached in areas such as arbitration award enforcement, but progress in mutual recognition and enforcement of civil and commercial judgments has been relatively slow.

2008年7月，最高人民法院公布了《关于内地与香港特别行政区法院相互认可和执行当事人协议管辖的民商事案件判决安排》。该安排规定，内地人民法院和香港特别行政区法院在具有书面管辖协议的民商事案件中作出的须支付款项的具有执行力的终审判决，当事人可以根据本安排向内地人民法院或者香港特别行政区法院申请认可和执行。这一安排虽然在一定程度上解决了部分民商事判决的互认与执行问题，但适用范围较为有限，仅适用于当事人协议管辖的案件，大量没有协议管辖的案件仍然无法通过该机制得到解决。

In July 2008, the Supreme People's Court announced the "Arrangement on Mutual Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Cases between Mainland and Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Courts under the Agreement of the Parties". This arrangement stipulates that in civil and commercial cases where there is a written jurisdiction agreement between the mainland people's court and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region court, the parties may apply to the mainland people's court or the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region court for recognition and enforcement of the final judgment with enforceability that requires payment. Although this arrangement has to some extent resolved the issue of mutual recognition and enforcement of some civil and commercial judgments, its scope of application is relatively limited, only applicable to cases under the jurisdiction of the parties' agreement. A large number of cases without agreement jurisdiction still cannot be resolved through this mechanism.

随着两地民商事交往的日益紧密，对更广泛、更高效的判决互认与执行机制的需求愈发迫切。经过多年的协商与努力，2019年1月14日，最高人民法院审判委员会通过了《最高人民法院关于内地与香港特别行政区法院相互认可和执行民商事案件判决的安排》（以下简称 “新《安排》”），并于 2024年1月29日起正式施行。新《安排》取代了2008年的旧安排，进一步拓宽了两地互相认可和执行的民商事判决范围，涵盖了更多类型的民商事案件，为两地当事人提供了更全面的司法保障。

With the increasingly close civil and commercial exchanges between the two places, the demand for a broader and more efficient mechanism for mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments is becoming more urgent. After years of consultation and efforts, on January 14, 2019, the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People's Court passed the "Arrangement of the Supreme People's Court on Mutual Recognition and Enforcement of Civil and Commercial Case Judgments between Mainland and Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Courts" (hereinafter referred to as the "New Arrangement"), which will officially come into effect on January 29, 2024. The new Arrangement replaces the old one in 2008, further expanding the scope of civil and commercial judgments recognized and enforced by both regions, covering more types of civil and commercial cases, and providing more comprehensive judicial protection for parties in both regions.

新《安排》明确规定，内地与香港特别行政区法院民商事案件生效判决的相互认可和执行，均适用本安排。刑事案件中有关民事赔偿的生效判决的相互认可和执行，亦适用本安排。同时，对“民商事案件”进行了详细界定，指依据内地和香港特别行政区法律均属于民商事性质的案件，但不包括香港特别行政区法院审理的司法复核案件以及其他因行使行政权力直接引发的案件。

The new Arrangement clearly stipulates that the mutual recognition and enforcement of effective judgments in civil and commercial cases between mainland China and Hong Kong Special Administrative Region courts shall be subject to this Arrangement. The mutual recognition and enforcement of effective judgments on civil compensation in criminal cases also apply to this arrangement. At the same time, "civil and commercial cases" have been defined in detail, referring to cases that are of a civil and commercial nature according to the laws of both the mainland and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, but excluding judicial review cases tried by the courts of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and other cases directly arising from the exercise of administrative power.

与旧安排相比，新《安排》不再局限于协议管辖的案件，将大量因合同纠纷、侵权纠纷等普通民商事纠纷产生的判决纳入了互认与执行的范围。例如，在侵权纠纷中，内地消费者因购买香港某公司生产的缺陷产品而遭受损害，在内地法院获得胜诉判决后，可依据新《安排》向香港法院申请认可和执行该判决，要求香港公司承担赔偿责任。

Compared with the old arrangement, the new arrangement is no longer limited to cases governed by agreements, and includes a large number of judgments arising from ordinary civil and commercial disputes such as contract disputes and infringement disputes in the scope of mutual recognition and enforcement. For example, in infringement disputes, mainland consumers who suffer damages due to purchasing defective products produced by a Hong Kong company can apply to the Hong Kong court for recognition and enforcement of the judgment based on the new "Arrangement" after obtaining a winning judgment in the mainland court, and demand that the Hong Kong company assume compensation liability.

新《安排》对“判决”的定义进行了细化，在内地包括判决、裁定、调解书、支付令，但不包括保全裁定；在香港特别行政区包括判决、命令、判令、讼费评定证明书，不包括禁诉令、临时济助命令。对于“生效判决”也分别作出了明确规定，在内地是指第二审判决，依法不准上诉或者超过法定期限没有上诉的第一审判决，以及依照审判监督程序作出的上述判决；在香港特别行政区是指终审法院、高等法院上诉法庭及原讼法庭、区域法院以及劳资审裁处、土地审裁处、小额钱债审裁处、竞争事务审裁处作出的已经发生法律效力的判决。

The new "Arrangement" has refined the definition of "judgment", which includes judgments, rulings, mediation agreements, and payment orders in mainland China, but does not include preservation rulings; In the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, it includes judgments, orders, judgments, and certificates of taxation, but does not include injunctions or temporary relief orders. Clear provisions have also been made for "effective judgments", which in mainland China refer to second instance judgments, first instance judgments that are not allowed to be appealed or have not been appealed within the statutory time limit, and judgments made in accordance with the trial supervision procedure; In the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, it refers to legally effective judgments made by the Court of Final Appeal, the Court of Appeal and the Court of First Instance of the High Court, the District Court, as well as the Labour Tribunal, Land Tribunal, Small Claims Tribunal, and Competition Tribunal.

这种细化规定使得两地在判决互认与执行过程中对判决的认定更加清晰准确，减少了因概念模糊而产生的争议。

This refined regulation makes the recognition and enforcement of judgments between the two places clearer and more accurate, reducing disputes arising from vague concepts.

新《安排》对于原审法院管辖权的认定作出了详细规定。符合下列情形之一，且依据被请求方法律有关诉讼不属于被请求方法院专属管辖的，被请求方法院应当认定原审法院具有管辖权：原审法院受理案件时，被告住所地在该方境内；原审法院受理案件时，被告在该方境内设有代表机构、分支机构、办事处、营业所等不属于独立法人的机构，且诉讼请求是基于该机构的活动；因合同纠纷提起的诉讼，合同履行地在该方境内；因侵权行为提起的诉讼，侵权行为实施地在该方境内；合同纠纷或者其他财产权益纠纷的当事人以书面形式约定由原审法院地管辖，但各方当事人住所地均在被请求方境内的，原审法院地应系合同履行地、合同签订地、标的物所在地等与争议有实际联系地；当事人未对原审法院提出管辖权异议并应诉答辩，但各方当事人住所地均在被请求方境内的，原审法院地应系合同履行地、合同签订地、标的物所在地等与争议有实际联系地。

The new "Arrangement" has made detailed provisions on the determination of the jurisdiction of the original court. If any of the following situations are met and the litigation does not fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the court of the requested party according to the relevant laws of the requested party, the court of the requested party shall determine that the original court has jurisdiction: when the original court accepts the case, the defendant's domicile is within the territory of that party; When the original court accepted the case, the defendant had representative offices, branches, offices, business offices, and other non independent legal entities within the territory of that party, and the litigation request was based on the activities of that organization; Lawsuits arising from contract disputes, where the place of performance of the contract is within the territory of that party; Lawsuits filed for infringement, where the infringement occurred within the territory of that party; If the parties to a contract dispute or other property rights dispute agree in writing to be under the jurisdiction of the original court, but both parties have their domicile within the territory of the requested party, the original court shall be the place where the contract is performed, the place where the contract is signed, the place where the subject matter is located, or any other place that has an actual connection to the dispute; If the parties have not raised any objection to the jurisdiction of the original court and have responded to the lawsuit, but both parties have their domicile within the territory of the requested party, the place of the original court shall be the place where the contract is performed, the place where the contract is signed, the place where the subject matter is located, or any other place that has a practical connection to the dispute.

此外，对于知识产权侵权纠纷案件以及内地人民法院审理的《中华人民共和国反不正当竞争法》第六条规定的不正当竞争纠纷民事案件、香港特别行政区法院审理的假冒纠纷案件，侵权、不正当竞争、假冒行为实施地在原审法院地境内，且涉案知识产权权利、权益在该方境内依法应予保护的，才应当认定原审法院具有管辖权。明确的管辖权规定有助于避免因管辖权争议导致的判决互认与执行障碍，提高司法效率。

In addition, for intellectual property infringement disputes, civil cases of unfair competition disputes as stipulated in Article 6 of the Anti Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China tried by mainland courts, and counterfeiting disputes tried by Hong Kong Special Administrative Region courts, if the infringement, unfair competition, or counterfeiting activities are carried out within the jurisdiction of the original court and the intellectual property rights and interests involved are legally protected within that jurisdiction, the original court should be recognized as having jurisdiction. Clear jurisdictional provisions can help avoid obstacles to mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments caused by jurisdictional disputes, and improve judicial efficiency.

在申请认可和执行的程序方面，新《安排》也作出了详细规范。申请认可和执行本安排规定的判决，在内地，应向申请人住所地或者被申请人住所地、财产所在地的中级人民法院提出；在香港特别行政区，向高等法院提出。申请人应当向符合条件的其中一家人民法院提出申请，向两个以上有管辖权的人民法院提出申请的，由最先立案的人民法院管辖。

The new Arrangement also provides detailed regulations on the procedures for applying for recognition and implementation. The application for recognition and enforcement of the judgment stipulated in this arrangement shall be submitted to the intermediate people's court in the applicant's domicile or the respondent's domicile or property location in mainland China; In the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, submit to the High Court. The applicant shall submit an application to one of the eligible people's courts. If an application is submitted to two or more people's courts with jurisdiction, the people's court that first filed the case shall have jurisdiction.

申请时，应当提交申请书、经作出生效判决的法院盖章的判决副本、作出生效判决的法院出具的证明书，证明该判决属于生效判决，判决有执行内容的，还应当证明在原审法院地可以执行、判决为缺席判决的，应当提交已经合法传唤当事人的证明文件，但判决已经对此予以明确说明或者缺席方提出认可和执行申请的除外以及身份证明材料等。这些规范使得当事人在申请判决互认与执行时有章可循，提高了申请的成功率和执行的效率。

When applying, an application form, a copy of the judgment stamped by the court that made the effective judgment, and a certificate issued by the court that made the effective judgment should be submitted to prove that the judgment is an effective judgment. If the judgment has execution content, it should also be proved that it can be executed in the place of the original trial court. If the judgment is a default judgment, proof documents that the parties have been lawfully summoned should be submitted, except for those where the judgment has clearly stated this or the absent party has applied for recognition and execution, as well as identity proof materials. These norms provide parties with clear guidelines for applying for mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments, improving the success rate of applications and the efficiency of enforcement.

2024年11月20日，北京四中院审结了D某与张某申请认可和执行香港特别行政区高等法院民商事判决案。该案是新《安排》施行后内地首例适用该安排认可和执行香港法院民商事判决的案件。

On November 20, 2024, the Beijing Fourth Intermediate People's Court concluded the case of D and Zhang's application for recognition and enforcement of the civil and commercial judgment of the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. This case is the first case in mainland China to apply the new Arrangement to recognize and enforce civil and commercial judgments of Hong Kong courts.

2024年5月7日，香港特别行政区高等法院原讼法庭对D某请求张某返还款项并支付利息的诉讼作出民事判决，要求张某向D某支付 723,695.99美元及相应利息、费用。2024年9月4日，D某向北京四中院提出申请，请求依法认可和执行上述民事判决。

On May 7, 2024, the Court of First Instance of the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region made a civil judgment on D's lawsuit requesting Zhang to return the funds and pay interest, requiring Zhang to pay D 723695.99 US dollars and corresponding interest and expenses. On September 4, 2024, D applied to the Beijing Fourth Intermediate People's Court for the recognition and enforcement of the aforementioned civil judgment in accordance with the law.

北京四中院经审查认为，案涉民商事判决属于新《安排》生效后香港法院作出的民商事生效判决，不存在新《安排》规定的不予认可和执行的情形，遂裁定认可和执行上述民事判决。这一案例具有重要的示范意义，它不仅为后续类似案件的处理提供了实践参考，也充分体现了新《安排》在保障当事人合法权益、促进两地民商事交往方面的积极作用。通过这一案例，当事人切实感受到了新《安排》带来的便利，无需再通过繁琐的重新诉讼程序来实现自己的权益，大大节省了时间和成本。（引用自《北京日报》2024年12月17号第六版）

After examination, the Beijing Fourth Intermediate People's Court deemed that the civil and commercial judgment involved in the case belongs to the effective civil and commercial judgment made by the Hong Kong court after the new "Arrangement" came into effect, and there is no situation of non recognition and enforcement as stipulated in the new "Arrangement". Therefore, the court ruled to recognize and enforce the above-mentioned civil judgment. This case has important demonstrative significance. It not only provides practical reference for the handling of similar cases in the future, but also fully reflects the positive role of the new Arrangement in safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of the parties and promoting civil and commercial exchanges between the two places. Through this case, the parties involved have truly felt the convenience brought by the new "Arrangement", without the need to go through cumbersome re litigation procedures to realize their rights, greatly saving time and costs.

2024年12月，佛山市中级人民法院作出裁定，认可和执行香港特别行政区高等法院作出的生效民商事判决。该案为新《安排》施行后，粤港澳大湾区内地法院首例适用该安排认可和执行香港特别行政区法院民商事判决的案件。

In December 2024, the Intermediate People's Court of Foshan City made a ruling recognizing and enforcing the effective civil and commercial judgments made by the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. This case is the first case in which mainland courts in the Guangdong Hong Kong Macao Greater Bay Area have recognized and enforced civil and commercial judgments of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region courts under the new Arrangement after its implementation.

内地居民陈某斌因与湖北神某公司、香港神某公司合同纠纷一案在香港提起民事诉讼，香港法院于2024年7月26日判决湖北神某公司、香港神某公司向陈某斌支付租金、投资款及相应利息、诉讼费。该判决已发生法律效力。因该公司在佛山有财产，2024年10月11日，陈某斌向佛山市中级人民法院申请认可与执行上述民商事判决，湖北神某公司、香港神某公司对上述申请无异议。

Mainland resident Chen  filed a civil lawsuit in Hong Kong over a contract dispute with a Hubei Company and a Hong Kong Company. On July 26, 2024, the Hong Kong court ruled that Hubei Company and Hong Kong Company should pay Chen rent, investment funds, corresponding interest, and litigation costs. The judgment has taken legal effect. Due to the company's property in Foshan, on October 11, 2024, Chen applied to the Foshan Intermediate People's Court for recognition and enforcement of the above-mentioned civil and commercial judgment. Hubei Company and Hong Kong Company have no objection to the above application.

佛山中院经审查认为，案涉判决属于新《安排》施行后香港法院作出的生效民商事判决，不违反内地法律的基本原则或社会公共利益，符合新《安排》关于内地法院认可和执行香港法院所作民商事判决的各项条件。12月2日，距离陈某申请不到两个月时间，佛山市中院即裁定认可和执行香港特别行政区高等法院作出的全部生效民事判决。12月16日，该裁定正式发生法律效力。

After examination, the Foshan Intermediate People's Court believes that the judgment in question belongs to the effective civil and commercial judgments made by Hong Kong courts after the implementation of the new "Arrangement", which does not violate the basic principles of mainland law or the public interest of society, and meets the various conditions of the new "Arrangement" for mainland courts to recognize and enforce civil and commercial judgments made by Hong Kong courts. On December 2nd, less than two months after Chen's application, the Foshan Intermediate People's Court ruled to recognize and enforce all effective civil judgments made by the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region High Court. On December 16th, the ruling officially came into legal effect.

这一案例在粤港澳大湾区具有重要的标杆意义，进一步推动了大湾区内地与香港之间的司法规则衔接和机制对接，为大湾区内大量的跨境民商事纠纷解决提供了高效的司法路径，有力地促进了大湾区的经济融合与发展。

This case has important benchmark significance in the Guangdong Hong Kong Macao Greater Bay Area, further promoting the connection of judicial rules and mechanisms between mainland China and Hong Kong in the Greater Bay Area, providing an efficient judicial path for the resolution of a large number of cross-border civil and commercial disputes in the Greater Bay Area, and effectively promoting the economic integration and development of the Greater Bay Area.

尽管新《安排》在推动内地与香港判决互认与执行方面取得了显著进展，但在实际操作中仍面临一些挑战。一方面，两地法律制度的差异依然存在，对于一些法律概念和规则的理解可能存在分歧，这在管辖权认定、判决的实质审查等环节可能引发争议。例如，在合同纠纷中，对于合同履行地的认定，内地和香港的法律规定可能存在细微差别，需要在具体案件中进行准确判断和协调。另一方面，不同法院的审判实践和司法习惯也可能对判决互认与执行产生影响。香港法院在审判中注重遵循先例，而内地法院更侧重于依据成文法进行裁判，这种差异可能导致在某些情况下对同一事实的认定和法律适用存在不同观点。

Although the new Arrangement has made significant progress in promoting mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments between mainland China and Hong Kong, there are still some challenges in practical operation. On the one hand, there are still differences in the legal systems of the two places, and there may be differences in understanding some legal concepts and rules, which may lead to disputes in areas such as jurisdiction determination and substantive review of judgments. For example, in contract disputes, there may be slight differences in the legal provisions between mainland China and Hong Kong regarding the determination of the place of contract performance, which requires accurate judgment and coordination in specific cases. On the other hand, the trial practices and judicial customs of different courts may also have an impact on the mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments. Hong Kong courts tend to follow precedents in their trials, while mainland courts focus more on making judgments based on written law. This difference may lead to different views on the determination of the same fact and the application of the law in certain situations.

展望未来，内地与香港应进一步加强司法交流与合作。通过建立常态化的法官交流机制、学术研讨活动等方式，增进两地司法人员对彼此法律制度和审判实践的了解，减少因差异导致的误解和争议。同时，随着科技的不断发展，可以探索利用信息化手段，如建立跨境司法协助信息平台，实现案件信息共享、申请材料在线提交等功能，提高判决互认与执行的效率。此外，还应根据实践中出现的新问题、新情况，及时对相关制度进行调整和完善，不断优化两地判决互认与执行机制，为两地民商事交往提供更加坚实的司法保障，助力“一国两制”事业行稳致远。

Looking ahead, the mainland and Hong Kong should further strengthen judicial exchanges and cooperation. By establishing a regular mechanism for judge exchange and academic seminars, we aim to enhance the understanding of each other's legal systems and judicial practices among judicial personnel in both regions, and reduce misunderstandings and disputes caused by differences. Meanwhile, with the continuous development of technology, it is possible to explore the use of information technology, such as establishing a cross-border judicial assistance information platform, to achieve functions such as case information sharing and online submission of application materials, and improve the efficiency of mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments. In addition, relevant systems should be adjusted and improved in a timely manner according to new problems and situations that arise in practice, continuously optimizing the mutual recognition and enforcement mechanism of judgments between the two places, providing more solid judicial guarantees for civil and commercial exchanges between the two places, and helping the "One Country, Two Systems" cause to achieve stability and long-term development.