I.  Overview

（I）Basic statistics

1. Statistics on cases accepted and concluded

Throughout the year of 2021, the Court in total handled 2472 cases1 including 2220 cases newly accepted and 252 cases left over from previous years. 2171 cases were concluded in the year, making the clearance rate reach 87.82%. Compared with the statistics of 2020 on a year-on-year basis, the numbers of newly-accepted cases and concluded cases both decreased, respectively by 17.56% and 20.42%, and the clearance rate also decreased by 3.9%.

In 2021, the Court in total handled 1469 contentious cases, 1297 of which were newly accepted (consisting of 824 first-instance admiralty and maritime cases, 65 maritime administrative cases2, and 408 other cases). The subject matters of the newly-accepted contentious cases valued in aggregate at about RMB 3,745,697,600. On the other hand, the Court concluded 1257 contentious cases in the year (consisting of 812 first-instance admiralty and maritime cases, 68 maritime administrative cases and 377 other cases), amongst which 305 cases were concluded by judgment, 255 settled through mediation, 265 withdrawn and 432 concluded by other means (including non-contentious means and otherwise), making the clearance rate of contentious cases reach 85.57%.

In the year, the Court in total handled 997 enforcement cases, 920 of which were newly accepted, and involved a total value of about RMB 1,883,738,600. The year also saw the Court concluding 914 enforcement cases, with effective enforcement value totaling about RMB 1,477,807,800. The clearance rate of enforcement cases reached 91.68%.

In the year, the Court in total arrested 42 vessels and auctioned or sold 29 vessels. 21 vessels were successfully auctioned or sold, with the hammer prices totaling up to RMB198 million.

2. Quality and efficiency of trials

（1）The rate of judgments announced in court was 10.34%, 2.53% higher than that of 2020.

（2）The rate of clearance within statutory period for trial of contentious cases reached 100%.

（3）The rate of clearance within statutory period of cases where property is available for enforcement was 98.77%.

（4）The rates of mediation and withdrawal were 49.68% and 20.2% respectively.

（5）The rate of satisfaction with first-instance judgments was 82.74%, showing a slight decrease compared with 2020.

（6）173 cases of appeal against judgments issued by the Court were concluded in the second instance where 2 judgments were amended, and 5 cases were remanded for retrial. The rate of amendment of first-instance judgments and remand for retrial was 2.71%, showing a significant decrease compared with 2020.

3. Other statistics

（1）1141 judgments were published online.

（2）369 hearings were live broadcasted, attracting 197286 views, and 101 hearings were convened online due to the COVID-19 epidemic. The rate of live broadcast of hearings was 51.04%.

（3）The disclosure rate of judicial process information reached 100%, with the effective disclosure rate of such information being 99.83%.

（4）By the end of 2021, the rate of electronic filing reached 100%.

（Ⅱ）Highlights

1. In escorting high-quality development of marine economy, the Court formulated the Work Opinions of Xiamen Maritime Court on Serving and Guaranteeing the Accelerated Construction of “Maritime Fujian” and the Opinions of Xiamen Maritime Court on Implementing Services and Guarantees for Maritime Silk Road.

2. In serving higher-level opening up, the Court formulated the first guidance on the ascertainment of foreign law in Fujian courts, and tried and concluded China’s first case of recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings based on the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law of our country, which was mentioned in the Report on the Work of The High People’s Court of Fujian Province in 2021.

3. In supporting high-standard marine ecological protection, the Court enhanced consultation with sea-related administrative agencies on issues including use and administration of the sea areas involved in major municipal engineering construction projects such as construction of Xiamen’s new airport and construction of Maluanwan New Town and on law enforcement in cases of transportation of dangerous chemicals, established a “Collaboration Base for Judicial Protection of the Marine Ecology” in the largest national mangrove nature reserve in Fujian Province, and published on the “World Oceans Day” model cases regarding, among others, punishing ships with "three noes" (no ship number and name, no ship’s certificate and no port of registry).

4. In handling of COVID-19 related cases, the Court satisfactorily resolved a series of epidemic-related cases involving small and micro enterprises and port and shipping logistics companies, helping them to walk through difficulties, and concluded a case concerning dispute over contract of carriage of goods by sea between a Taiwan company and the shipping magnate Maersk A/S and 4 cases concerning dispute over ship mortgage loans between the Export-Import Bank of China and a fishery company at a total value as high as RMB 1.2 billion, all arising due to the COVID-19 epidemic.

5. In promoting high-quality development of the seafarer service industry, the Court opened a press briefing, releasing the Report on Trials to Support and Guarantee High-Quality Development of the Seafarer Service Industry as well as five model cases.

6. In producing fine works on maritime trial, the Court formulated and implemented the Work Opinions on Strengthening the Construction of Fine Works on Maritime Trial, thanks to which 3 cases were listed in the Ten Model Maritime Trial Cases of Chinese Courts in 2020, 8 judgments were selected in the world’s first collection of Chinese maritime cases written in English, and 4 cases were listed in the corresponding Model Cases of Fujian Courts of the year.

7. The Court deepened the work mechanism of Taiwan-related maritime trials. The Court’s release of the first white paper on Taiwan-related maritime trials in China was mentioned in the Report on the Work of the Supreme People’s Court delivered by Mr. ZHOU Qiang, president of the Supreme People’s Court, to the National People’s Congress in 2021, and a case handled by the Court was listed as one of the Ten Model Cases of the People’s Courts’ Protection of the Rights and Interests of Taiwan Compatriots.

8. The Court upgraded the “1+7+N” work mechanism adopting marine “Fengqiao Experience”, and signed a multi-party collaboration agreement with provincial sea-related administrative agencies including the Department of Natural Resources of Fujian Province, Fujian Provincial Department of Ocean and Fisheries, Fujian Maritime Safety Administration and China Coast Guard Fujian Bureau, to integrate resources to govern maritime disputes and provide services and guarantees for the construction of “Maritime Fujian”.

9. The Court developed a new “123+N” enforcement work mode in 2021, increasing the rate of clearance within statutory period of cases where property is available for enforcement to 98.77% and the rate of clearance of enforcement cases to 91.68% and maintaining 100% pass rate of cases concluded by termination of current enforcement proceedings and zero complaint by letters and visits about enforcement.

II.  Main features of cases

（I）Conventional admiralty and maritime cases continued to be the majority of newly-accepted cases, and the value of subject matters significantly increased

In the year of 2021, 1469 contentious cases were handled by the Court, 1257 of which were concluded, showing year-on-year decreases by 21.34% and 33.24% respectively. Such decreases were mainly attributable to the significant decrease of cases of confirmation of maritime claims from 909 to 83, i.e., year-on-year decrease by 90.87%. In the terms of case categories, the proportion of cases of dispute over seaman service contract showed a notable increase, from 12% in 2020 to 27%, rising to top 1 in all the cases newly accepted. Conventional admiralty and maritime cases, such as cases concerning dispute over contract of carriage of goods by sea, cases concerning dispute over confirmation of maritime claims, cases concerning dispute over liability for personal injury at sea or at waters leading to the sea and case concerning dispute over contract of freight forwarding by sea or by waters leading to the sea, still took a major part in the cases newly accepted throughout the year of 2021 and ranked top in the terms of number of cases. Cases concerning dispute over ship mortgage contract, cases concerning dispute over insurance contract arising at sea or at waters leading to the sea, and cases concerning dispute over charter party all showed a large increase in the number of cases newly accepted, though their proportions did not stand out. It is worth noting that there were 337 cases involving banks, insurance companies, mutual insurance associations and other financial institutions as litigants, accounting for about 24% of all the cases newly accepted in 2021, which shows the new feature of increased cases concerning dispute over shipping finance. In the terms of value of subject matter, the subject matters of the newly-accepted contentious cases valued in aggregate at about RMB 3,745,697,600, showing a year-on-year increase of RMB 1,524,837,400 or by 68.66%. Amongst the newly-accepted contentious cases, there were 5 cases involving a subject matter valuing over RMB 100 million, 42 cases involving a subject matter valuing between RMB 10 million and RMB 100 million, 51 cases involving a subject matter valuing between RMB 5 million and RMB 10 million and 159 cases involving a subject matter valuing between RMB 1 million and RMB 5 million. They pertained to various disputes such as ship mortgage, shipbuilding, wharf building, ship ownership, ship charter, carriage of goods by sea and liability for property damage at sea. Amongst these cases involving a large amount of subject matter, there were 4 cases concerning dispute over ship mortgage contract, and all of them involved policy-based loans and multiple guarantee instruments, having the features of complicated case facts, numerous interested parties, and great social influence.

Comparison of Contentious Cases Accepted and Concluded

from 2017 to 2021

Distribution Chart of Causes of Action of Admiralty and Maritime Cases Newly-Accepted in 2021

（Ⅱ）Cases concerning dispute over contract of carriage of goods by sea increased significantly, involving more links of dispute

In the year of 2021, 141 cases concerning dispute over contract of carriage of goods by sea were newly accepted by the Court, showing a year-on-year increase by 74.07%. They accounted for 17.11% of the first-instance admiralty and maritime cases in 2021, with the total value of the subject matters reaching approximately RMB 86,060,000, and 128 of them were concluded, with the rate of mediation / withdrawal reaching 56.25%. As the construction of the Belt and Road continuously progressed and the pilot free trade zones further developed, challenges and opportunities coexisted in the shipping industry. Under the impact of COVID-19 epidemic prevention and control measures, there was capacity shortage at major coastal ports, terminals and berths, resulting in serious congestion in fairways. Particularly, the COVID-19 epidemic prevention and control policies led to lockdown of ports, unsmooth cargo handling and frequent vessel delay. Consequently, disputes over contract of carriage of goods by sea arising from demurrage, failure to provide ship or cargo, detention, overtime storage charge and failure to take delivery of cargo substantially increased in the shipping industry.

（III）New changes took place in legal issues in cases involving people's livelihood, making it more difficult to hear such cases

New issues emerged in cases involving people's livelihood, especially cases concerning dispute over seaman service contract and cases concerning dispute over liability for personal injury at sea or waters leading to the sea, making it more difficult to hear such cases. For example, in cases concerning dispute over seaman service contract, as the costs and expenses claimed by the seaman included transportation costs, accommodation expenses and other related expenses incurred by quarantine due to the COVID-19 epidemic prevention and control after he signed off from the vessel and his wages during the quarantine period, issues such as how to apportion the quarantine expenses between the seaman and the shipping company and whether the basic wage or any other standard should be applied to pay the seaman’s wages during the quarantine period became new difficulties in the trial of such cases. Another example is the apportionment of liability for personal injury in illegal activity. In recent years, efforts to crack down on illegal sand dredging, illegal fishing, oil smuggling and other illegal activities in coastal areas have been significantly intensified, and illegal and criminal activities were found in some cases concerning dispute over personal injury cases at sea, where the seaman got injured while engaging in an illegal activity. Under such circumstances, whether the seamen’ claim for damages was legitimate, how to handle interlocked penal and civil issues, and whether the principle of mixed fault shall apply, were all new types of legal issues. As these new issues in cases involving people's livelihood were related to people’s vital interests, they were of high concern to people and the relevant adjudications would play a strong exemplary and guiding role, which required the judges to have a higher level of capacity on law application and case-handling.

（IV）The proportion of fishing vessels in cases concerning ship arrest and auction increased sharply

In the year of 2021, the proportion of fishing vessels in cases concerning ship arrest and auction increased substantially. Except the Singapore-registered vessel “Ocean Stellar” and other 3 cargo vessels which were arrested before and during the litigation, all the vessels actually arrested, in total 38 vessels, were domestic or deep-sea fishing vessels, accounting for 90.48% of the arrested vessels, showing year-on-year increase by 40.48%, among which 25 fishing vessels were auctioned/sold, accounting for 86.21% of the vessels auctioned/sold. Such sharp increase were attributable to the continuing decline of offshore fishery resources due to pollution and overfishing in offshore fishery waters and drop of sale prices at the aquatic product market, as well as the changes of national policies concerning subsidy for construction of fishing vessels, subsidy for fuel consumption in the production and operation of fishing vessels, and protection of fishery resources, and the implementation of closed fishing season policy. All these factors made the production situation of traditional fishing vessels steadily worsen, and the owners of fishing vessels became insolvent, as a result of which the fishing vessels were arrested and auctioned. In combination with other adverse factors, especially the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and rising labor costs and oil prices, the traditional fishing industry was having a harder time.

III.     Special issues in the 2021 trials and recommendations

 

（I）Pay attention to the balance of interests when dealing with COVID-19 related maritime disputes

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on foreign-related economic fields such as import and export trade, shipping, and deep-sea fishing. The proportion of COVID-19 related maritime disputes, especially contractual disputes, increased in 2021. There were mainly three types of COVID-19 related maritime disputes: dispute over contract of ship mortgage loan due to difficulty in business operation of a deep-sea fishing company caused by the COVID-19 epidemic, dispute over contract of seaman service on board a foreign vessel or a fishing vessel, and dispute over contract of carriage of goods by sea arising from high demurrage caused by the COVID-19 epidemic prevention and control measures. In addition, there were a few other disputes such as dispute over contract of ship operation and management and dispute over contract of ship financial leasing. How to accurately determine force majeure or change of circumstances, how to reasonably guarantee the resumption of work and production of enterprises affected by the epidemic and their employees, and how to avoid prolonged court proceedings caused by the epidemic became the major problems encountered in the handling of COVID-19 related cases. By deeply construing the Supreme People’s Court’ judicial interpretations on several issues of properly handling civil cases involving the COVID-19 epidemic, comprehensively considering the duration and extent of impact of the epidemic or the epidemic prevention and control measures on the performance of contract, and fully applying the diversified dispute resolution mechanism with a focus on balance of interests and from the perspective of fairness and reasonableness, the Court properly resolved a number of COVID-19 related disputes. When any COVID-19 related dispute arises between the parties to a contract, the parties to the contract are recommended to take the shared risks and balance of interests as the principle of handling and strive to maintain the stability of the contract. If the contract can still be performed, the parties should try to continue to perform as agreed, but if it is indeed impossible to perform as agreed due to the impact of the epidemic or the epidemic prevention and control measures, the parties should negotiate to change the contract and adopt alternative performance or deferred performance.

（II）Refine the rules for administration and supervision of marine ecological damage compensation

Marine ecological damage compensation refers to, after a marine ecological environmental damage event occurs, where the marine ecological environmental damage cannot be restored or fully restored and the obligor to compensation who caused the damage fails to perform or fully perform his obligations, the fund paid by the obligor to compensation initiatively or in accordance with the compensation agreement reached through negotiation or an effective court judgment. On 11 March 2020, nine departments including the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of National Resources, the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate jointly issued the Measures for the Administration of Ecological Environmental Damage Compensation Fund (for Trial Implementation), identifying the ecological environmental damage compensation fund as non-tax revenue of government subject to centralized collection of treasury and expressly specifying that the ecological environmental damage compensation fund shall be fully paid to the treasury at the same level of the department or organ designated by the obligee to compensation and shall be applied in a coordinated manner for work related to the restoration of the ecological environment of the place where the damage occurs. However, there are no specific provisions therein on how to pay the ecological environmental damage compensation fund and how to administer and supervise the application of it. When handling a public interest litigation related to marine ecological environment, the Court begun to explore the establishment of a special fund for the affected nature reserve by transferring the marine ecological damage compensation paid by the obligor to compensation to a special account for the affected nature reserve to restore the damaged marine environment. In order to better exert the role of the marine ecological damage compensation, relevant departments are recommended to formulate more detailed regulations on the basis of existing laws and regulations and promote the establishment of a special fund account for the marine ecological damage compensation, to ensure the compensation fund will be timely applied for the restoration of damaged marine ecological environment to the maximum extent. Meanwhile, in order to encourage administrative agencies and other subjects to file public interest litigation related to marine ecological environment, it is advisable to consider establishing a fund for public interest litigations related to marine ecological environment to pay from it for the identification and assessment fee or other related costs and expenses, to improve the initiative of eligible subjects to file public interest litigation related to marine ecological environment and better protect the marine ecological environment.

（III）Standardize the administrative punishments for illegal sea reclamation

In recent years, as the protection of marine ecological environment is intensified, some law enforcement agencies have heavily cracked down on illegal sea reclamation and have protected the safety of the sea areas in an effective and well-regulated manner. However, in the trial of maritime administrative cases related to illegal sea reclamation, the Court found there were deviations in the understanding and application of laws by sea-related administrative law enforcement agencies. It is expressly stated in Article 42 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Administration of Sea Areas and the Reply of the Legislative Affairs Commission of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress on Issues concerning the Application of Article 42 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Administration of Sea Areas that anyone who illegally occupies any sea area shall be imposed upon a fine on the basis of the sea area use fees that should have been paid according to the size of the sea area during the illegal occupation. However, when calculating the fine to give administrative punishment, the sea-related administrative agencies did not take into account the specific situation of the case and simply adopted the sea area use fees on the basis of one-off levy to calculate the fine, which lead to fines of the same amount no matter how long the sea area was illegally occupied. This is inconsistent with the principle of proportionality in the administrative penalty law, and is also easy to cause the parties subject to administrative penalty to neglect rectification, which is unfavorable to the restoration of the ecological environment. Given this, sea-related administrative agencies are recommended to refer to relevant laws to further standardize and refine relevant law enforcement standards and accurately apply the punishment standards and scales according to the specific illegal occupation of sea area and the extent of rectification in individual cases, to effectively exert the function of administrative penalty in punishment and education and promote further improvement of law-based ocean governance level.

IV. Conclusions

In the year of 2021, rooted in the characteristics of maritime adjudication, Xiamen Maritime Court has actively served and integrated into the new development paradigm and continuously promoted the high-quality development of maritime judicial work. In 2022, Xiamen Maritime Court will adhere to the guidance of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, continue to advance serving the overall situation, administrating justice for the people and maintaining judicial fairness, and provide quality judicial services and guarantees for Fujian Province in its striving to build China into a modern socialist country, to set the stage for the 20th National Congress of the CPC with concrete actions.