On 20 September 2026, China’s Supreme People’s Court published the Provisions on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Civil Dispute Cases Involving Criminal Offences (法释〔2026〕19号). The Provisions run to 24 articles and take effect on 22 September 2026. Earlier judicial interpretations that conflict with them give way.
The Provisions set out how Chinese courts should handle a situation that is common in commercial practice: a civil dispute and a criminal case arising out of the same events. In 2025, Chinese courts closed more than 220,000 first-instance cases of this kind; over 60 per cent of them were contract disputes.
Why this matters to foreign businesses
For a foreign company or individual with a commercial claim in China, the practical question has often been whether the civil claim can proceed at all. One longstanding tactic has been to file a criminal complaint against the other side and then argue that the civil case must wait until the criminal case is resolved. Claims have been left in limbo for years on that basis. The Supreme People’s Court has said expressly that it intends to prevent criminal means being used to interfere improperly in economic disputes.
The new Provisions narrow that route.
Article 4 provides that a civil case accepted under Article 3 is tried separately from the related criminal case and is not affected by the criminal proceedings. Article 5 requires a court to examine substantively any application to suspend the civil case on the strength of a criminal case-filing receipt, and to refuse it where the conditions are not met. Where the two cases do not involve the same facts, the court explains why to the authorities and continues.
Article 3 lists six situations in which the civil claim must be accepted — including a claim against a company whose legal representative or employee committed the crime, and a claim against a guarantor who was not an accomplice.
Two further points are worth noting. A contract is not void merely because someone committed a crime in connection with it; its validity is decided under the Civil Code (Article 17). And where an employee dealt with you under apparent authority, the company is bound even though the employee committed fraud; where there was no apparent authority, the company may still be liable in damages if it was at fault (Article 19).
The interaction also runs the other way on evidence. Facts found in a criminal judgment need not be proved again in the civil case unless contrary evidence is sufficient to overturn them (Article 6). But a fact that was not established in the criminal case, because it fell short of the criminal standard of proof, may still be established in the civil case on the civil standard (Article 8).
What to watch
The Provisions do not settle everything. The Supreme People’s Court has said that some questions remain contentious and has left them open for now, to be developed through guiding cases. And the pivotal judgement — whether the civil dispute and the criminal case involve the same facts — is fact-specific.
Whether to report a matter to the authorities, when to issue proceedings, and how a criminal complaint is framed all affect the civil claim. The sequence matters, and the wrong order can cost a year or more. This is work for a lawyer familiar with both sides of the line.
This article is general information about a legal development. It is not legal advice, and it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every matter turns on its own facts — please take formal advice from a qualified lawyer before acting.