Dispute resolution
Dentons China

Dentons’ Hangzhou office was founded in 2008 and has since seen significant growth across all areas of practice. With more than 100 lawyers, the litigation team at this full-service branch actively works across the full spectrum of practice areas, including commercial disputes, international arbitration, government and corporate compliance, administrative litigation, construction and real estate, intellectual property and labour disputes.

The leaders of the team are director Jianwen He and managing partner Wanjun Xu. Both are active in commercial disputes.  

During the research period, the team acted for Ningbo Construction Engineering against Lanxi Xirui Real Estate Development and Zhejiang Sanlian Group in a construction contract dispute; acted for Ningbo Yuanwang China Real Estate Development against Beijing Weiheng Law Firm Shanghai office in an arbitration case of an agency contract dispute; and acted for Zhejiang Zheyin Financial Leasing in its financial leasing contract dispute case, with the subject value of Rmb392 million.

The firm hired partner Shoudao Wang from King & Wood Mallesons’ Hangzhou office, and Yan Wang from Guantao Law Firm in Hangzhou. They specialise in construction and international trade, respectively.

East & Concord Partners

The dispute resolution team of East & Concord Partners’ office in Zhejiang are strong in all kinds of commercial litigation and domestic and international commercial arbitration. The firm’s intellectual property practice witnessed an improvement too. Within the disputes team, many lawyers are senior arbitrators of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission and other arbitration institutions. Commercial disputes specialist Yanshan Li is a key name in the team.

Last year, the commercial disputes team acted for Bank of Hangzhou Shanghai branch against Shanghai Jinghe Industrial over financial loan contract disputes; acted for China Petroleum Pipeline Bureau Engineering against Brightoil Petroleum Storage and Transportation in a construction contract dispute; and acted for Tongxian Industrial against Hangzhou Langrong Investment on a dispute over the housing lease contract.

Also, the IP disputes team acted for Zhejiang Shenghe Network Technology and Shanghai Kaiying Network Technology against Suzhou Xianfeng Network Technology in a game copyright infringement dispute. This case is the first judicial decision where specific rules and plots in gaming are protected by the copyright law in China.

T&C Law Firm

Headquartered in Hangzhou, T&C Law Firm has grown into a leading legal institution throughout Zhejiang province, enjoying increased market share through a strategic development process that has allowed it to go from strength to strength. With about 400 attorneys and specialists, T&C practices in all fields of law, including international trade and investment, dispute resolution, real estate and construction, and intellectual property.

Sun Li plays an important role at the firm, and she is an expert in commercial disputes. International arbitration specialist Leon Fu is a key name in the disputes team. He is also active in commercial and transactions disputes.

In commercial and transactions, the firm acted for Bank of Communications International Trust in a dispute over a financial loan contract against BOCO Inter-Telecom; represented ZheShang Bank Hangzhou branch against Great Wall Film & Culture Enterprise Group and Wuwei Silk Road Cultural Heritage Expo City on an arbitration on contract disputes; and acted for Zhejiang Jiulongshan International Golf Club against Zhejiang Jiulongshan Development on a contractual dispute.

In international arbitration, the firm successfully acted for GEOX regarding a dispute involving shareholders and affiliated companies injuring the interests of the company’s creditors. This case is typical in international arbitration outside China.

Key clients include Amazon, General Electric Company, Hyundai Heavy Industries, Alibaba Group, Ali-Pay and Sina Group.

Client feedback

“Professional, dedicated and considerate.”– International arbitration

Tian Yuan Law Firm

Tian Yuan Law Firm’s Hangzhou office hosts approximately 10 lawyers and is a boutique firm focused on commercial and IP disputes. Qi Lou is a key name in the Hangzhou office and was the lead partner on several cases during the research period.

Last year, the team acted for a client developing the health industry in Hangzhou in a contract dispute against an international culture group in Beijing. The special feature of this case was the court’s jurisdiction following the company's change in registered place, and this required active communication between the lawyer and the court. This case can provide reference for similar cases in the future.

Zhong Lun Law Firm

Zhong Lun Law Firm has been enjoying a coveted position as one of the strongest and most in-demand litigation firms in China, and its Hangzhou office continues its strong presence in the local disputes market. With strength in domestic and international litigation, the team regularly represents clients in achieving excellent results in commercial disputes and construction and real estate.

The dispute resolution team includes construction and real estate specialist Li Hao, and commercial disputes expert Chengjie Zhang.

In 2021, the firm acted for Zhejiang Kangyu Real Estate against 22 owners with respect to a series of disputes over the pre-sale contract for commercial housing. Through this case, the disputes have been resolved and a large number of other potential cases have also been settled smoothly by means of mediation, thereby effectively resolving social conflicts and achieving a win-win situation in terms of both the legal and the social effects.

Also, the firm handled the series of lawsuits collectively filed by 31 owners of Mushuilanxuan against the developer Hangzhou Kaize Real Estate Development with respect to the pre-sale contracts of commercial housing. This is the first case in Hangzhou where the claim in the class action filed by the said owners for confirming the invalidity of the provisions in the supplementary agreement was completely rejected by the court.