Rules for Evaluating the Behavior of Arbitrators

Article 1  These rules are formulated to strengthen the management of arbitrators and ensure that they perform their duties in an independent, impartial, diligent and cautious manner.


Article 2  Arbitrators shall observe discipline and obey the law, be impartial and upright honest and self-disciplined, and strictly abide by the Code of Conduct for Arbitrators.


Article 3  Arbitrators shall assiduously study the theory of arbitration, become proficient in their practices, frequently update their knowledge, refine their analytical ability and judgment on their own initiatives, maintain a high professional level in law and in their specialized areas, and constantly improve their case handling skills.


Article 4  Arbitrators shall hear cases independently and impartially based on facts, in accordance with the law, with reference to international practices and in adherence to the principles of justice and fairness.


Article 5  Arbitrators shall handle cases in an independent, impartial, diligent and cautious manner. They shall treat both parties equally and shall not represent the interests of either party.


Article 6  An arbitrator shall not accept nomination or appointment if any of the following circumstances exists:


1. The arbitrator shall withdraw according to the law; 


2. The arbitrator is unable to participate in an oral hearing within two months of nomination or appointment;


3. Due to his or her heavy workload, the arbitrator cannot ensure enough time and energy to handle the case with the necessary level of care;


4. The arbitrator is unable to participate in the hearing of the case due to health reasons;


5. The arbitrator is unable to handle the case competently due to his or her unfamiliarity with the subject matter of the case;


6. The arbitrator is serving as the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Arbitration Commission or as a staff member of the Secretariat of the Arbitration  Commission or its Sub-Commissions or its liaison offices at the time of nomination by the parties; and


7. Other such reasons exist that make it inappropriate for the arbitrator to accept nomination or appointment.


Article 7  When formally accepting nomination or appointment, an arbitrator shall submit a declaration of acceptance truthfully. If any of the following circumstances exists, the arbitrator shall voluntarily disclose in writing  to the Arbitration Commission:


1. The arbitrator or his/her employer is related to the case or has previously had business contact with either of the parties;


2. The arbitrator is a colleague of another arbitrator in the case;


3. The arbitrator and a party or its primary manager or agent have full time positions in the same social organization and frequently come into contact with each other;


4. The arbitrator’s close relative is employed by a party or its agent;


5. The arbitrator holds an official position in an organization that is related to the case;


6. The arbitrator or the arbitrator’s close relative has possible right of recourse with regard to the winner or loser in the case;


7. A close personal relationship exists between the arbitrator and a party or its agent;


8. The arbitrator shares collective rights or obligations with a party or its agent, or has any other kind of business or property relationship with a party or its agent; and


9. Other circuamstances exist that create reasonable doubt in the eyes of the parties as to the impartiality and independence of the arbitrator. 


If an arbitrator becomes aware of a circumstance that needs to be disclosed after formally accepting nomination or appointment, the arbitrator shall immediately make the disclosure.


Article 8  If any of the following circumstances exists, an arbitrator should make a request to the Arbitration Commission for withdrawal on his or her own initiative. The parties and the other members of the arbitral tribunal may also submit a written petition to the Chairman of the Arbitration Commission to challenge the arbitrator, with specific reasons stated therein. The Chairman will then make a decision on the challenge. The Chairman may also make such a decision on his or her own initiative.


1. The arbitrator is a party to the case or is a close relative of a party or its agent;


2. The arbitrator has a personal stake in the case;


3. The arbitrator has other ties with a party or its agent that may affect the impartiality of the arbitration;


4. The arbitrator has met with a party or its agent in private or has accepted a gift or invitation from the latter.


For the purpose of these Rules, the phrase “other ties” in Item 3 of the preceding paragraph refers to the following circumstances:
(1) The arbitrator has previously given advice on the same case to a party or its agent;
(2) The arbitrator is currently a colleague of a party or its agent or used to be a colleague of the latter within the past two years;
(3) The arbitrator is currently the legal adviser or agent of a party or has acted as the legal adviser or agent of a party within the past two years;
(4) The arbitrator has recommended or introduced an agent to a party;
(5) The arbitrator has served as a witness, appraiser, forensic examiner, defense lawyer or litigation/arbitration agent in the same case or in a related case; and

(6) Other circumstances exist that might affect the impartiality of the arbitration.


Article 9 If any of the following circumstances exists in an arbitrator’s handling of a case that may seriously affect the quality and impartiality of the case and prevent its timely resolution, the arbitrator in question, other members of the arbitral tribunal or either of the parties may, pursuant to Article 37 of the Arbitration Law of the People’s Republic of China, submit a written petition to the Chairman of the Arbitration Commission to replace the arbitrator, with specific reasons stated therein. The Chairman will then make a decision on the replacement. The Chairman may also make such a decision ex officio.


1. The arbitrator lacks the necessary knowledge and ability to handle a case;


2. The arbitrator has failed to fulfil his or her due diligence obligations;


3. The arbitrator has failed to conduct arbitral proceedings in accordance with the Arbitration Rules; and


4. Other circumstances exist that demonstrate the arbitrator’s incompetence or inappropriateness to perform his or her duties.


Article 10 When an arbitrator commits a violation of the Code of Conduct for Arbitrators or the Case Management Standards for Arbitrators other than those listed above, the Arbitration Commission shall assess the situation in its totality. If it determines that reasonable doubt exists as to the conduct of the arbitrator which might affect the parties’ confidence in the Arbitration Commission or damage the image of the Commission, but the violation does not warrant withdrawal, replacement or dismissal of the arbitrator, the Commission shall issue a warning to the arbitrator. Circumstances where an arbitrator shall receive a warning include but are not limited to the following:


1. The arbitrator prevents the timely resolution of the case under false excuses;


2. The arbitrator receives phone calls, text-messages, leaves the room casually, or dresses inappropriately during an oral hearing;


3. The arbitrator displays bias during an oral hearing and in the arbitral proceedings, including either directly or covertly assisting one party by examining evidence, making arguments, raising claims or asking obviously leading questions for that party;


4. The arbitrator fails to participate in the deliberations or investigations of the arbitral tribunal or be late for an oral hearing without justified reasons.;


5. The arbitrator changes the time for an oral hearing after it is confirmed, or fails to reserve enough time for an oral hearing, resulting in the scheduling of an additional hearing; and


6. The arbitrator makes inappropriate comments on a case to the outside without prior approval of the Arbitration Commission.


Article 11   If any of the following circumstances exists during an arbitrator’s term of service, the Arbitration Commission has the authority to dismiss that arbitrator:


1. The arbitrator has been convicted of a crime or received serious administrative punishment for violation of law;


2. The arbitrator deliberately conceals facts or circumstances that, would have resulted in his or her withdrawal once disclosed;


3. The arbitrator fails to appear in an oral hearing without justified reasons;


4. The arbitrator fails twice to participate in the deliberations or investigations of the arbitral tribunal or be late for an oral hearing twice in a year;


5. The arbitrator changes the time for  oral hearings twice in a year, or fails to reserve enough time for oral hearings twice in a year, resulting in the scheduling of additional hearings;


6. The arbitrator fails to remain impartial during the arbitral proceedings;


7. The arbitrator bears primary responsibility for the delays in the arbitral proceedings;


8. The arbitrator reveals his or her own opinion or the deliberations of the arbitral tribunal to a party;


9. The arbitrator fails to perform his or her duties in a diligent and cautious manner, fails to carefully read the case materials or get familiar with the case, and is seriously irresponsible;


10. The arbitrator engages in favoritism and commits irregularities, or perverts the law in rendering an arbitral award;


11. The arbitrator meets  a party in private, or accepts an invitation or gift or other benefits from a party.


12. The arbitrator inquires about the details of a case, entertains or gives gifts, or provides advantages or benefits to those involved in the case on behalf of a party;


13. The arbitrator insists in supporting one party’s claims and arguments and/or opposing the other party’s claims and arguments, not capable of explaining the reasons behind;


14. The arbitrator contacts another arbitrator of the same case in private to artificially create a majority opinion in disregard of the facts and law, for the improper interests of a party;


15. The arbitrator fails to participate in the trainings for arbitrators in accordance with the Rules for Arbitrator Trainings;


16. The arbitrator has received two warnings in one term of service; and


17. The arbitrator commits other violations of the Code of Conduct for Arbitrators that make it inappropriate for the arbitrator to continue his or her service.


Article 12 When an arbitrator receives a party’s complaint forwarded by the Arbitration Commission, no matter what kind of circumstances it is concerned about, the arbitrator shall deal with it seriously and provide a full and faithful explanation in writing to the Arbitration Commission.


Article 13 The evaluation and supervision of arbitrators is the responsibility of the Arbitrators’ Qualifications Review Board, while their daily matters are in the charge of the Secretariat of the Arbitration Commission.


Article 14 Based on the result of evaluation, the Arbitrators’ Qualifications Review Board may decide to issue a warning to an arbitrator or report the result to the Arbitration Commission for its decision on an immediate dismissal of the arbitrator or as its basis in deciding whether or not to renew the arbitrator’s term of service. The specific matters shall be handled by the Arbitration Commission in accordance with the Rules for the Engagement of Arbitrators.


Article 15 Once the Arbitration Commission learns of relevant information, parties’ complaints or evaluations of an arbitrator, the Secretariat shall record the main points of the facts in file and for compilation, and promptly notify the arbitrator in question. The arbitrator may at any time request the Secretariat to examine the compiled record and has the right to explain any matters in the record. The arbitrator may also point out errors in the record and ask for corrections.


Article 16 These Rules, passed in December 2003, revised by the Chairman’s Council of the Arbitration Commission on January 8, 2009, is effective as from March 1, 2009.