Dr. Arthur (Xiao) Dong
Qualified Year: 1996 Bar qualification of the People’s Republic of China
Dr. Arthur (Xiao) Dong is a partner from JunHe LLP. He has worked as a PRC lawyer nearly 30 years. He has focused on complex matters of international commercial arbitration and litigation in relation to cross-border transactions. His expertise covers a wide spectrum, including: international trade, technology transfer and intellectual property protection, cross-border investments, antitrust private litigation and M&A, as well as distribution and franchise disputes. He has been continuously recognized as a leading practitioner in arbitration by renowned organizations such Chambers, Who’s Who Legal, Legal 500, Benchmark, and Asialaw.
Arthur has been enrolled in the listed Panel of Arbitrators/Mediators of several well-established arbitration institutions such as HKIAC, SIAC, KCAB, CIETAC, BAC, SHIAC, SCIA, AIAC, WIPO. He is also a council member of the HKIAC. Arthur is a sought-after arbitrator among the Asia-Pacific arbitration institutions. Arthur has been appointed as arbitrator on more than 330 occasions. He is also a frequent speaker on international commercial arbitration and mediation.
He has been acting as legal counsel or arbitrator under the CIETAC Rules, BAC Rules, SHIAC Rules, ICC Rules, UNCITRAL Rules, HKIAC Rules, SIAC Rules, SCC Rules, ICDR Rules, etc. He has served as counsel in more than 30 cases concerning the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in different jurisdictions pursuant to the New York Convention. He has also been invited to act as an expert witness on Chinese law in several arbitration and litigation cases outside of China.
Arthur is the author/co-author of several books/articles on international dispute resolution. As an active author of law practice articles, he has also published a number of works with Lexis Nexis.
Practice Area
Panel
- Contributing Author
Experience
- AnJie Law Firm (2013 - 2021)
- Lantai Partners (2009 - 2013)
- Anli Partners (2007 - 2008)
- C& A Law Firm (2001 - 2006)
- Branch Mediation Center of CCPIT (China Council for the Promotion of International Trade) (1996 - 2000)
- Hebei International Freight Forwarding Co., Ltd. (1992 - 1996)
Membership
- Council Member, Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC)
- Arbitrator, Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC)
- Arbitrator, Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC)
- Arbitrator, Korean Commercial Arbitration Board (KCAB)
- Arbitrator, China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC)
- Arbitrator, Beijing Arbitration Commission / Beijing International Arbitration Center (BAC)
- Arbitrator, Shanghai International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission / Shanghai International Arbitrator Center (SHIAC)
- Arbitrator, Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration
- Arbitrator, China Maritime Arbitration Commission (CMAC)
- Arbitrator, Arbitration Center Across the Straits (ACAS)
- Arbitrator, Asian International Arbitration Centre (AIAC)
- Arbitrator and Mediator, World Intellectual Property Organization Arbitration and Mediation Centre (WIPO)
- Member, ICC Commission on Arbitration and ADR
- Member, ICC Commission on Commercial Law and Practice
- Reporter for China, ITA (The Institute for Transnational Arbitration)
- Research Fellow, Institute of International Arbitration, Renmin University of China
Qualifications
- Ph. D (2009)
- LL. M (2006)
- LL. B (1992)
Education
- China University of Political Science and Law (2009)
- Beasley School of Law, Temple University (2006)
- China University of Political Science and Law (1992)
3 Contributions by Arthur (Xiao) Dong
PRACTICE NOTES
Challenging arbitral jurisdiction in China: anti‑suit objections, validity of agreements and judicial review under the 2025 PRC Arbitration Law
This Practice Note considers challenges to the jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals under the Arbitration Law of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) (the Arbitration Law).
This Practice Note has been revised to reflect the 2025 amendments, taking effect on 1 March 2026, by the National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China. All citations to provisions of the Arbitration Law are to the amended law. Disputes over a Chinese arbitral institution’s competence commonly turn on whether the arbitration agreement is binding. Under Article 5 of the Arbitration Law (as amended in 2025), arbitral tribunals have exclusive competence to hear disputes where the parties ‘have concluded an arbitration agreement’. Correspondingly, Article 5 also restrains PRC courts from taking jurisdiction ‘unless the arbitration agreement is null and void’. Accordingly, a jurisdictional objection typically targets the validity and binding effect of the parties’ arbitration agreement...
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
Interim measures in Mainland China arbitration: court-only relief, application routes and thresholds, enforcement, and Hong Kong/Macau mutual assistance (PRC Arbitration Law and Civil Procedure Law, 2025 amendments)
Interim measures in support of arbitration in China
This Practice Note reviews the availability of interim measures in aid of arbitration in China under the law of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The references to ‘China’ and ‘PRC’ denote Mainland China, excluding Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan. It has been updated to reflect the 2025 amendments that take effect on 1 March 2026, and all citations to the Arbitration Law are to the law as amended. In China, arbitral tribunals have no authority to grant interim measures, irrespective of the arbitration rules selected. They are also barred from doing so even where the applicable rules expressly purport to confer such powers. Put simply, a party seeking interim measures must first submit its request to the arbitration institution, which will then transmit the application to the competent court. Arbitration institutions and tribunals are not permitted to consider the merits of an interim measures application. Under Article 104 of the Civil Procedure Law (‘Civil Procedure Law’, amended in 2023 and effective from 1 January 2024), a claimant in arbitration may apply for interim...
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
Setting aside arbitral awards in Mainland China: jurisdiction, procedure, time limits, grounds, suspension of enforcement, and Prior Reporting under the 2023–2026 legal reforms
The National People’s Congress of the People’s of China
Under PRC law, a party to arbitration may petition a PRC court to challenge or set aside an arbitral award. In many jurisdictions, the set-aside is termed vacation or annulment. This Practice Note has been updated to account for the 2025 amendments, which come into force on 1 March 2026. All references to articles of the Arbitration Law are to the law as amended.
Jurisdiction of the PRC courts and general procedure
As a matter of statute, PRC courts may annul only those arbitration awards seated in Mainland China and issued by arbitration institutions in Mainland China (Article 72 of the Arbitration Law, as amended in 2025). The Arbitration Law has no binding effect on awards seated outside those territories. Consequently, PRC courts have no power to set aside awards seated in Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, or in foreign states. Accordingly, the Arbitration Law binds only Mainland-seated proceedings and Mainland institutions within the PRC...
Arbitration
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.
