Is Hong Kong the future capital for cross-border dispute resolution and international mediation?

The Pearl of the Orient is widely known for its towering skyscrapers and vibrant nightlife, but what about its emerging role in navigating cross-border disputes? As transnational conflicts continue to rise, this article explores the upward trajectory of Hong Kong as a prominent hub for global arbitration and mediation, primarily due to its geographical advantage and strong international ties.

Authors: David Ravenscroft, Senior Consultant | Yanka Wong, co-author and intern

Global Showdowns: A New Era of Cross-Border Disputes

Given the ever-evolving landscape of international relations and commerce in the 21st century, the growth of trade and cultural exchanges is inevitable, and with it an increase in conflicts and disputes. Globalisation can lead to fragmentation in legal harmonisation for companies operating across different jurisdictions and regulations. Conflicts over international contracts, compliance matters, intellectual property rights, and commercial transactions often impede interconnectivity and economic development. As businesses expand their opportunities for transnational investments and technological advancements continue to accelerate, the digital world presents trans-jurisdictional risks of infringement and regulatory changes that may fuel further conflicts and disagreements.

The traditional resolution to conflicts: litigation. However, these are the 4 main obstacles in cross-border litigation

To address these disputes, cross-border litigation has become increasingly prevalent as a means of resolving conflicts, with many law firms adopting this approach. Litigation is the traditional option due to its structured and formal legal framework, the right to appeal court decisions, and stronger authority regarding the enforcement of judgments. However, this does not mean it is without its challenges:

1. Jurisdiction

   These disputes are often multi-jurisdictional, and determining which court has the authority to hear and resolve the case can be tough. The use of different official court languages also exposes cultural differences and communication barriers. Moreover, a party may win a case in their home country but are unable to enforce that judgment in another jurisdiction due to foreign judgements. Fortunately, these issues can be resolved with jurisdictional agreements, or by courts applying forum non conveniens - a legal doctrine which allows a court to decline to hear a case if another court is more convenient for the parties and better serves the interests of justice.
   

2. Legal representation

   Finding attorneys with expertise in both domestic and foreign jurisdictions can be difficult, especially with potential language barriers. However, in recent years, there has been a significant increase in multi-jurisdictional law firms that address the evolving needs of clients seeking legal services across borders.
   

3. Evidence standards

   The variability in the discovery and admissibility of evidence complicates the preparation of cases. Additionally, there can be logistical obstacles in gathering evidence across international borders.

   
   

4. Risks of forum shopping

   The Plaintiff may exploit the multi-jurisdictional nature of cross-border disputes and attempt to choose the most favourable jurisdiction, thereby increasing their chances of receiving a favourable ruling.

Privacy and other benefits of arbitration and mediation as alternative dispute resolution methods

Recently, an increasing number of companies have sought alternative solutions that are quicker, cheaper, and more effective than traditional cross-border litigation. The growing recognition of international arbitration and mediation as preferable options helps to mitigate the aforementioned challenges while prioritizing the preservation of relationships, ultimately serving the best interests of the companies involved.

"Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbours to compromise whenever you can" | Abraham Lincoln

While Lincoln’s message may not apply to every situation, there is certainly merit in the value of peaceful negotiation and compromise. International arbitration - a private and binding method for resolving disputes before a neutral tribunal based on party agreement - has gained popularity. By selecting a neutral arbitrator, parties can avoid potential biases from either side's home jurisdiction, while also enjoying greater flexibility and autonomy to customize their process. Ease of enforcement is also a significant advantage: arbitral awards are recognized in over 150 countries due to international agreements like the New York Convention, making them more effective for cross-border dispute resolution. Furthermore, the confidentiality of private arbitration proceedings ensures that information about both parties is securely protected.

Another option is international mediation, where a neutral third party assists in reaching a mutually acceptable agreement through communication and negotiation. This widely known diplomatic method stresses collaborative resolution to de-escalate tensions and prevent conflicts that may arise from traditional litigation. Like arbitration, mediation offers a tailored, personal approach that places the relationship between both parties at the forefront, ensuring a private and less time-consuming dispute resolution process.

See also one of David Ravenscroft’s videos explaining the differences between arbitration and mediation: https://youtu.be/-28t2d1gtKE.

Introducing Hong Kong in This New Age of Global Connectivity

No longer just renowned for its culinary scene and cultural fusion, Hong Kong might next be known as a place for cross-border dispute resolution. Positioned at the heart of Asia, the city is a gateway to Mainland China and a bridge to the rest of the world, providing access and transportation between both sides.

Beyond its geographical advantages, Hong Kong has the only Chinese-English bilingual common law jurisdiction, adept at managing disputes involving parties from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds. Its attractive tax regime and multicultural society further welcome a wide range of businesses to resolve their international disputes there, aligning with the Hong Kong government’s eager promotion of alternative dispute resolution policies. For example, the HKIAC (Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre) and the ICC International Court of Arbitration are both well-established institutions that supervise and oversee arbitration proceedings. On 30 May 2025, the IOMed (International Organization for Mediation) was established as the first intergovernmental organisation dedicated to dispute resolution through mediation, with its headquarters in Hong Kong.

The Future of Cross-Border Dispute Resolution with Hong Kong as its hub

While specifics are uncertain, it seems increasingly promising that Hong Kong is to play a significant role internationally. The city’s strong commitment to efficient dispute resolution makes it a cultural and economic hub for handling cross-border disputes through litigation, arbitration, and most recently brought to light, mediation. As global connectivity continues to expand, Hong Kong's position as a leading centre for these processes is likely to strengthen.

---

Disclaimer: Whilst every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this article, it is general in nature and does not constitute legal advice of any kind. You should seek your own personal legal advice before taking legal action. We accept no liability whatsoever for loss arising out of the use or misuse of this article.

For specific advice about your situation, please contact:

David Ravenscroft 

Senior Consultant

+852 2388 3899

dr@rs-lawyers.com.hk