Recently, the Supreme People’s Court issued a reply regarding jurisdiction. In fact, this reply reaffirms certain practices that have long been applied in judicial practice.
In practice, where a plaintiff initiates a lawsuit, only five locations may serve as the place of jurisdiction:
The domicile of the plaintiff;
The domicile of the defendant.
The place where the contract was concluded.
The place where the contract is performed;
The location of the subject matter.
If the plaintiff and defendant agree in their contract on a jurisdiction other than these five locations, such agreed jurisdiction shall be invalid. In other words, jurisdiction may only be exercised by a place that has an actual connection with the transaction between the parties.
Another key point of this reply is that it once again clarifies: if a contract provides for both court jurisdiction and arbitration jurisdiction — that is, if it simultaneously designates an arbitration commission for arbitration and a people’s court for litigation — the arbitration agreement shall be invalid, while the agreement on the place of litigation shall remain valid.
I am Xuzhou lawyer Qiang Lyu. If you like my video, please like, subscribe, and save it.