What Changed
- English High Court enforced PRC judgments and Article 253/264 interest in Hangzhou Jiudang [2022] and Qing Li [2026].
- Australian Supreme Courts in New South Wales and Victoria granted full enforcement of Chinese monetary judgments in three separate decisions (2024–2025).
- Hong Kong Court of First Instance in [2026] HKCFI 5896 deemed mainland statutory post-judgment interest penal and non-registrable.
Litigants and business entities seeking to enforce monetary judgments rendered in mainland China across foreign jurisdictions face varying judicial treatments regarding mainland China's statutory post-judgment interest. Under Article 253 (renumbered as Article 264) of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (PRC), defaulting judgment debtors are subject to delayed performance interest. A commentary authored by Meng Yu and Wenliang Zhang published on Conflict of Laws .net examines recent jurisprudence in England, Australia, and Hong Kong SAR to evaluate the enforceability of this statutory interest outside mainland China.
### Legal Framework of Mainland China's Delayed Performance Interest
In mainland China, the mechanism governing interest on delayed performance was clarified by the Supreme People's Court (SPC) in its 2014 Interpretation on Several Issues concerning the Applicable Law for Calculating the Interest of Debt on Delayed Performance in Enforcement Procedures. Under this judicial interpretation, interest payable for delayed performance comprises any applicable contractual interest combined with default interest calculated at a fixed multiplier of 0.0175% per day (equivalent to approximately 6.39% per annum).
The authors of the commentary argue that this double post-judgment interest—which they term 'Statutory Post-Judgment Interest (SPI)'—is non-penal, moderate in rate, and enforceable under the legal framework of 'legitimate interest plus proportionality.'
### Enforcement in English Courts
Courts in England have consistently enforced mainland Chinese monetary judgments together with the statutory post-judgment interest under Article 253 (now Article 264) of the PRC Civil Procedure Law:
1. **Hangzhou Jiudang Asset Management Co Ltd & Anor v Kei [2022] EWHC 3265 (Comm)**: The High Court of Justice of England and Wales enforced two monetary judgments originating from Hangzhou courts in Zhejiang Province, mainland China, totaling GBP 14,320,174.45 along with the associated post-judgment interest.
2. **Qing Li & Ors v Fan Demetris Yuan & Anor [2026] EWHC 242 (Comm)**: The English High Court enforced five judgments issued by Nanjing courts in Jiangsu Province, mainland China, amounting to RMB 240 million (approximately GBP 25 million) plus interest.
3. **Xiong Wei & Anor v Wang Junhong [2026] EWHC 1892 (Comm)**: The English High Court considered enforcement and finality issues regarding Chinese retrial judgments.
### Enforcement in Australian Courts
Australian courts have likewise permitted full enforcement of monetary judgments from mainland Chinese courts together with post-judgment interest:
1. **Zhengzhou Lvdu Real Estate Group Co v Shu [2024] NSWSC 58**: The Supreme Court of New South Wales granted enforcement of a mainland Chinese judgment in full.
2. **Fu v Pang [2025] VSC 597**: The Supreme Court of Victoria ordered the enforcement of the Chinese monetary judgment.
3. **Shanghai Chenggong Industrial Co Ltd v Zhihua Chen [2025] NSWSC 1112**: The Supreme Court of New South Wales recognized and enforced the Chinese court judgment.
### Refusal of Enforcement in Hong Kong SAR
In contrast to the approach taken in England and Australia, courts in Hong Kong SAR have adopted a restrictive position regarding mainland China's statutory post-judgment interest:
- In **[2026] HKCFI 5896**, the High Court of Hong Kong (Court of First Instance) characterized mainland China's post-judgment delayed performance interest as penal in nature. As a consequence of this penal characterization, the court ruled that the interest component was ineligible for registration and enforcement within Hong Kong SAR.
### Comparative Overview
The divergent treatments demonstrate contrasting judicial approaches to mainland China's statutory post-judgment interest. While English and Australian legal systems treat the 0.0175% daily statutory interest rate as an enforceable debt obligation accompanying valid judgments, Hong Kong SAR jurisprudence classifies the rate mechanism as unenforceable under rules barring penal recovery.
Who May Be Affected
Litigants, commercial judgment creditors, and cross-border dispute resolution practitioners enforcing mainland Chinese judgments across foreign jurisdictions.
Cross-Border Context
Comparative treatment of mainland Chinese monetary judgments and post-judgment interest calculations across common law jurisdictions including England, Australia, and Hong Kong SAR.
What to check next
- Hong Kong CFI judgment [2026] HKCFI 5896 to examine the court's reasoning on penal interest characterization.
- English decisions in Hangzhou Jiudang [2022] EWHC 3265 (Comm), Qing Li [2026] EWHC 242 (Comm), and Xiong Wei [2026] EWHC 1892 (Comm).
- Australian decisions in Zhengzhou Lvdu [2024] NSWSC 58, Fu v Pang [2025] VSC 597, and Shanghai Chenggong [2025] NSWSC 1112.
This article provides general information and does not constitute legal advice. Consult the official text and obtain advice appropriate to your circumstances where needed.