Cayman Grand Court Recognizes a Civil Mediation Statement from Shanghai Financial Court for the First Time
一、案件基本情况 | Case Background🌻
本案源于一起标的约人民币2,990万元的涉港股票回购合同纠纷。杭州某科创投资企业因标的公司未按期上市，依据回购协议向转让方及实际控制人（香港籍叶某）主张股票回购。案件由上海金融法院受理，承办法官虞憬深入了解案情与诉求，通过多轮调解，明确约定回购款分期付款方案、履行时限及违约连带责任等核心条款。调解书于2022年2月14日正式签署，具有明确资金数额和履行安排。
The dispute arose from a stock repurchase agreement worth approximately RMB 29.9 million, involving a Hangzhou-based sci-tech investment firm, which, due to the failure of the target company to go public on schedule, sought repurchase from the transferor and its controlling individual (a Hong Kong resident, referred to as Mr. Ye). The case was adjudicated by the Shanghai Financial Court. Judge Yu Jing facilitated multiple rounds of mediation, clarifying core terms such as staggered repayment schedules, strict performance timelines, and joint liability in case of breach. The parties officially signed the mediated agreement on 14 February 2022, specifying concrete amounts and execution arrangements.
二、开曼法院的认定 | Cayman Court’s Recognition🌻
2025年8月，开曼群岛大法院在审理该跨境保全与执行申请时，首次承认上海金融法院的这份民事调解书具有“终局性与确定性”，并将其等同视为可执行的金钱判决。该认定是调解书在离岸司法管辖区获得承认与执行的首例。法官采纳了中国律师事务所提供的法律意见，指出调解书在中国法律框架下与法院判决具有同等效力，即当事人与法官签字后即具法律约束力。法院还比照常见的 Tomlin order（普通法体系中常用的调解协议形式）进行了类比说明。
In August 2025, the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands, while handling the related cross-border preservation and enforcement application, recognized for the first time that the civil mediation statement issued by the Shanghai Financial Court was “final and conclusive,” thereby treating it as an enforceable money judgment. This marks the first instance in which such a mediation statement is recognized and enforced in an offshore jurisdiction. The Court relied on the legal opinion provided by a PRC law firm, affirming that under PRC law, once the mediation statement is signed by both the parties and the judge, it has binding judicial force equivalent to a judgment. The Court also drew a parallel to a “Tomlin order,” frequently used in common law jurisdictions to record settlement orders.
三、程序性工具的授权 | Procedural Relief Granted🌻
基于调解书的承认，开曼法院批准了中国当事人提出的三项关键程序性措施：
Based on the recognition of a settlement agreement, the Cayman Court approved three key procedural measures sought by Chinese parties:
·域外送达（Service out of jurisdiction）：允许运用境外方式送达法律文书，促进程序推进。
Service out of jurisdiction: allowing legal documents to be served abroad, thereby facilitating the continuation of proceedings.
·全球资产冻结令（Worldwide Freezing Order, WFO）：冻结范围覆盖全球资产，防止资产转移、规避责任。
Worldwide Freezing Order (WFO): covering assets on a global scale to prevent transfers or concealment aimed at evading liability.
·财务披露令（Asset Disclosure Order）：迫使债务人全面披露全球资产详情，以保障冻结令有效实施。
Asset Disclosure Order: compelling the debtor to fully disclose worldwide assets to ensure the effective enforcement of the freezing order.
上述制度也符合法庭对 WFO 和资产披露令行为标准的严格审查要求，包括申请人需提出有力证据显示存在“真实的资产散逸风险”（real risk of dissipation），以及要求“有足以争论的案由”（good arguable case）与“公正适宜性”（just and convenient），符合 Dos Santos案的三项测试标准。
These measures also comply with the court’s strict standards of review for WFOs and disclosure orders, requiring applicants to present strong evidence of a “real risk of dissipation,” demonstrate a “good arguable case,” and establish that the order is “just and convenient,” in line with the three-limb test set out in the Dos Santos case.
四、法律与实践意义 | Legal and Practical Implications🌻
• 丰富“可执行司法文书”范畴：不仅限于判决，调解书一经“终局性与确定性”认定即可执行。
• 提升中国司法文书的国际公信力：证明调解协议亦能成为跨境执行工具。
• 为债权人提供强有力路径：降低执行障碍，提高资产追回效率。
• 示范效应显著：其他普通法辖区（如香港、新加坡、BVI）或将更开放接纳此类调解文书。
• Expanded scope of “enforceable judicial instruments”: Mediation statements, once found to be “final and conclusive,” may be enforced, not solely judgments.
• Enhanced international credibility of Chinese judicial instruments: Demonstrates that mediated settlements can serve as enforceable cross-border tools.
• Stronger pathways for creditors: Reduces enforcement hurdles and enhances asset recovery efficiency.
• Significant demonstration effect: Common law jurisdictions such as Hong Kong, Singapore, and the BVI may increasingly accept similar mediation instruments in cross-border enforcement.
五、结语 | Conclusion 🌻
本案标志着中国法院调解文书在跨境执行领域迈出的重要一步，不仅彰显中国司法的国际影响力，也为国内企业涉外争议提供了全新策略路径。各方应密切关注此类判例，并在跨境交易与争议解决中合理运用调解工具应对国际执行挑战。
This case marks a pivotal advancement in cross-border enforcement of Chinese court-mediated settlements, enhancing the international standing of Chinese judiciary and offering novel strategic pathways for enterprises in overseas disputes. Parties should closely monitor such precedents and strategically employ mediation instruments in cross-border transactions and dispute resolution.
———————————
🌻如您正在规划企业出海、家族办公室或跨境架构搭建，欢迎留言或私信联系我们提供定制法律意见。
------------------
🌻联系购买再版书籍：
美国大法官推荐---《出海指南：中国企业全球化法律实务》：
境内：88人民币
海外：50加元 🌻
———————————
🌻🌻“跨境法谈”团队涉外服务（有偿）：
1.跨境法律咨询
2.商务合同起草 （中英文）
3.海外公司注册（避税天堂/欧美/加拿大/迪拜）
4.推荐海外专业律师（刑事/商务/其它）
5.跨境追债和执行
6.国际商务项目推介
7.国际项目融资合作
8.公共关系合作
9.其它法律事务🌻🌻
联系方式：bigdavid1227@qq.com
----------------------------------