Chen on China’s Jurisdictional Maximalism

Junhao Chen has posted on ssrn his forthcoming paper, China’s Jurisdictional Maximalism, 26 Wash. U. Global Studies L. Rev. __ (forthcoming 2026).  Here is a link to the paper, and here is the abstract:

In 2020, China began asserting judicial authority in ways that encroached upon the legal sovereignty of other jurisdictions around the world, including the United States. The front line of this incursion was an unprecedented wave of “anti-suit injunctions” issued by Chinese courts: judicial orders preventing non-Chinese litigants from suing, or continuing to sue, in other jurisdictions. Many scholars appear to regard these injunctions as reasonable, legitimate tools to protect the integrity of Chinese adjudication. Even those few critics who have raised concerns tend to frame such injunctions as unique features of transnational patent litigation in the telecom sector.

 

This Article argues that the wave of anti-suit injunctions should be understood, instead, as both the starting point and a crucial element of China’s grand strategy of jurisdictional maximalism: that is, the aggressive expansion of control by Chinese courts over litigation implicating China’s overseas interests. This strategy extends beyond critical patents in the telecom sector to embrace a broader set of international commercial disputes. Drawing on a review of Chinese judicial opinions, official statements, and trends in legal doctrine—most of which are unavailable in English translation—the Article reveals the scale of the emerging jurisdictional paradigm.

 

The Article also draws out the practical implications, for courts and firms outside China, of seeing jurisdictional maximalism clearly. Above all, non-Chinese courts are justified in taking defensive measures to protect their own jurisdiction. Such measures could include the issuance of “anti-anti-suit injunctions” that prohibit parties from seeking anti-suit injunctions from Chinese courts. Moreover, non-Chinese firms should appreciate the heightened litigation risk presented by the new maximalist program and request that foreign courts decline to recognize selective Chinese judgments.

As the author notes within the body of the paper, the WTO arbitration panel last year ruled against China's ASI policy, though he argues that it "did not categorically preclude the issuance of ASIs in FRAND cases"; and the paper discusses other issues as well, including Chinese courts' determinations of global FRAND royalties and Chinese antitrust enforcement. I might suggest reading the paper in conjunction with the recently-published PRC Guidelines on Countering Improper Extraterritorial Jurisdiction by Foreign States, which state, inter alia, both that China reserves the right to take measures to counteract improper extraterritorial jurisdiction undertaken by other states (article 3), and “to exercise extraterritorial jurisdiction over acts having an appropriation connection with China” (article 4).  These guidelines which have been noted in several other sources (and are available in translation from China Law Translate here, though I am using a machine translation myself), but I may have more to say about them soon.