EU Commercial Dispute Resolution and Arbitration in Belgium for Chinese Parties

18. July 2026

Chinese parties engaged in commercial transactions within the European Union increasingly turn to Belgium as a neutral and well-regulated forum for dispute resolution and arbitration. This guide in the voice of Jan Peeters at Peeters & Co Advocaten in Brussels outlines the decision framework for EU commercial dispute resolution and arbitration in Belgium for Chinese

Belgium as a Forum for Commercial Dispute Resolution

Belgium has positioned itself as a leading European centre for commercial dispute resolution, combining a modern arbitration law, world-class arbitration institutions, and a judiciary experienced in cross-border commercial litigation. Brussels, as the de facto capital of the European Union, hosts numerous international law firms specialising in dispute resolution, making it a natural venue for Chinese parties involved in EU-related commercial conflicts. The Belgian legal system offers both judicial dispute resolution through its courts and alternative dispute resolution through arbitration and mediation.

Arbitration in Belgium: CEPANI and Beyond

The Belgian Centre for Arbitration and Mediation (CEPANI) is the primary institutional arbitration body in Belgium. Established in 1969, CEPANI administers both domestic and international arbitrations under its modernised rules, which were updated to align with best international practice. For Chinese parties, CEPANI offers several distinct advantages:

📋 Neutral venue in Brussels with easy access for parties from both China and EU member states
⚖️ CEPANI Rules based on the UNCITRAL Model Law, familiar to Chinese arbitration practitioners
🧭 Multilingual proceedings available in English, French, and Dutch, eliminating the need for translation in most cases
🛡️ Fast-track arbitration procedure for disputes below EUR 1 million, with a streamlined timeline of approximately six months
💼 Emergency arbitrator provisions allowing interim relief within 15 days of application
📜 CEPANI Panel including arbitrators with specific expertise in China-EU trade and investment matters

⚖️ Strategic Note: Belgium is one of the few European jurisdictions that has removed the requirement for arbitration agreements to be in writing in the traditional sense. Under the Belgian Judicial Code, arbitration agreements can be concluded by any means of communication that provides a record of the agreement, including electronic exchanges — a feature that aligns well with modern Chinese commercial practice.

Comparison of Dispute Resolution Options

Factor	Belgian Court Litigation	CEPANI Arbitration	Mediation (Belgian Model)
Duration (typical)	12–24 months first instance	9–15 months	2–4 months
Cost (typical range)	EUR 50,000–150,000	EUR 80,000–200,000	EUR 15,000–40,000
Confidentiality	Public proceedings (subject to limited exceptions)	Confidential by default	Confidential by law
Appeal	Full appeal to Court of Appeal; further appeal to Court of Cassation	Limited to annulment on procedural grounds	Settlement agreement binding
Enforcement in China	Under Hague Choice of Court Convention (ratified by China in 2017 for commercial matters)	Under New York Convention (both China and Belgium parties, 170+ countries)	As contractual settlement
Language	Dutch, French, or German depending on region	Any language agreed by parties	Any language agreed
Neutrality for Chinese parties	Moderate — Belgian court, Belgian procedural law	High — tribunal composed of neutral arbitrators	High — mediator facilitates voluntarily

Judicial Dispute Resolution in Belgian Courts

Chinese parties may also resolve commercial disputes through the Belgian court system. The commercial divisions of the Courts of First Instance have jurisdiction over commercial disputes, with appeals lying to the Courts of Appeal and ultimately to the Court of Cassation on points of law. Key features of Belgian commercial litigation include:

📜 Written procedure with limited oral evidence compared to common law systems
🔍 Expert witnesses commonly appointed by the court rather than by the parties
🏠 No discovery equivalent to US practice; limited document production available for specifically identified documents
🗂️ Provisional measures available, including attachment orders and interim injunctions
⚖️ Third-party funding permitted and increasingly available in Belgium
💼 Costs follow the event principle, with the losing party typically paying a portion of the successful party costs based on judicial tariff scales

Enforcement of Foreign Judgments and Awards

For Chinese parties, enforcement is a critical consideration when choosing a dispute resolution forum. Belgium offers robust enforcement mechanisms for both foreign judgments and arbitration awards:

🛡️ New York Convention enforcement: Belgium and China are both parties. Arbitration awards from CEPANI or other recognised institutions are enforceable in China under the Convention, subject to limited grounds for refusal.
📦 Hague Choice of Court Convention: Both Belgium and China are parties. Commercial judgments from Belgian courts designated in exclusive choice of court agreements are enforceable in Chinese courts under streamlined procedures.
🔍 EU Regulation 1215/2012: Judgments from other EU member states are directly enforceable in Belgium without exequatur proceedings.
🧭 The Brussels I Recast framework provides for free movement of judgments within the EU, making Belgian judgments enforceable across all EU member states.

Practical Guidance for Chinese Parties

Chinese companies considering Belgium as a dispute resolution forum should take the following strategic steps. First, include a well-drafted arbitration clause in all EU-facing commercial contracts, specifying CEPANI or another agreed institution, the seat of arbitration (Brussels is recommended), the language of proceedings (English is strongly recommended), and the number of arbitrators. Second, consider including a tiered dispute resolution clause requiring negotiation and mediation before arbitration, as Belgian courts and CEPANI both support and can compel mediation attendance. Third, ensure that contracts with Belgian counterparties address service of process mechanisms, as formal service under the Hague Service Convention between China and Belgium requires translation into Dutch, French, or German depending on the recipient location. Fourth, maintain comprehensive documentary records in English or with certified translations, as Belgian courts and arbitration tribunals rely heavily on written evidence. Fifth, engage Belgian counsel registered with the Ordre des Avocats at the relevant Bar, as representation before Belgian courts is restricted to qualified advocates. Sixth, budget for potential adverse cost awards in litigation and consider after-the-event insurance to mitigate cost risk. Finally, Chinese state-owned enterprises should be aware that their status may raise questions of sovereign immunity in Belgian enforcement proceedings, and structuring commercial activities through separate legal entities is advisable to ensure treatment as commercial rather than sovereign actors.

Conclusion

Belgium provides Chinese parties with a comprehensive, neutral, and well-regarded framework for commercial dispute resolution. CEPANI arbitration offers a particularly attractive option, combining international best practice, multilingual capability, and arbitrators experienced in China-EU disputes. The Belgian court system provides a reliable alternative for litigation, supported by strong enforcement frameworks under both the New York Convention and the Hague Choice of Court Convention. With careful contractual drafting and strategic forum selection, Chinese companies can access effective dispute resolution mechanisms that protect their commercial interests across the European Union.

Advantages of Belgian Seat of Arbitration for Chinese Parties

Choosing Belgium as the seat of arbitration offers Chinese parties a combination of procedural neutrality, modern arbitration legislation, and enforcement advantages that are particularly valuable in China-EU commercial disputes. The Belgian Judicial Code, which governs arbitration seated in Belgium, is based on the UNCITRAL Model Law, providing a legal framework familiar to Chinese arbitration practitioners and consistently interpreted by Belgian courts in a pro-arbitration manner. Belgian courts have established a well-settled pro-enforcement approach to arbitration awards, and the grounds for challenging awards are limited to the Model Law grounds, which are narrowly construed. Belgian courts have exclusive jurisdiction to hear applications for the annulment of awards rendered in Belgium, and their decisions have consistently upheld the finality of arbitration awards, rarely interfering on substance. This pro-arbitration judicial environment, combined with the availability of highly specialised international arbitration practitioners in Brussels, makes Belgium an attractive and reliable seat for Chinese parties involved in EU-related commercial arbitration.

Mediation as a Cost-Effective Alternative

Belgian law and practice encourage mediation as a primary dispute resolution mechanism before resorting to arbitration or litigation. The Belgian Judicial Code allows courts to order the parties to attend an information session on mediation, and increasingly, Belgian commercial contracts include multi-tiered dispute resolution clauses requiring good-faith negotiations followed by mediation before arbitration may be commenced. CEPANI offers administered mediation services alongside its arbitration function, with a panel of accredited mediators experienced in cross-border commercial disputes. For Chinese parties, mediation offers significant advantages: lower cost, faster resolution (typically two to four months), preservation of commercial relationships, and confidentiality. The EU Mediation Directive, implemented in Belgium, ensures that mediation settlement agreements can be made enforceable through homologation by the competent court. Chinese parties should consider including an escalation clause in their EU-facing commercial contracts that requires a structured negotiation and, if unsuccessful, CEPANI mediation before proceeding to arbitration.

Enforcement Strategy and Practical Steps

Chinese parties holding a favourable arbitration award or judgment against a Belgian counterparty should implement a systematic enforcement strategy. The first step is to obtain a certified copy of the award or judgment, together with a certified translation into Dutch, French, or German as required by the competent enforcement court. For arbitration awards, the exequatur application is made to the President of the Court of First Instance in the jurisdiction where enforcement is sought, typically Brussels, Antwerp, or Liège depending on the location of the debtor assets. The exequatur procedure is generally straightforward and ex parte, meaning it is granted without notice to the debtor in most cases. Once exequatur is obtained, the next step is asset identification and freezing through garnishment orders, bank account seizures, or property attachments. Chinese parties should engage Belgian counsel early in the enforcement process to identify debtor assets and implement protective measures before the debtor has an opportunity to dissipate assets.

Cost Management and Third-Party Funding

Third-party funding is permitted and increasingly available in Belgium for both arbitration and litigation, although it is more established in arbitration. Funded Chinese parties should ensure that the funding agreement does not create conflicts of interest with the arbitral tribunal or the Belgian legal team, and that the funder independence from the parties is maintained. Belgian procedural law does not impose disclosure requirements for funding agreements in arbitration, but the arbitral tribunal may order disclosure if it considers the funding arrangement relevant to the proceedings. Chinese parties should also be aware that the costs recoverable from an unsuccessful Belgian counterparty are limited to the judicial tariff scale, which generally covers only a portion of actual legal costs. Most commercial contracts therefore include provisions allocating costs more broadly in favour of the prevailing party.

📋 Cost Note: Belgium offers a comprehensive legal aid system for parties with insufficient financial resources, but commercial parties engaged in cross-border disputes generally bear their own costs and may be required to provide security for costs in certain circumstances.

Conclusion

Belgium provides Chinese parties with a sophisticated, neutral, and well-regarded forum for resolving commercial disputes arising from EU-China trade and investment. The availability of CEPANI arbitration, supported by a pro-arbitration judiciary and modern legislation based on the UNCITRAL Model Law, makes Belgium an attractive choice for Chinese companies seeking reliable dispute resolution mechanisms. The court system provides an effective alternative for litigation and enforcement, backed by strong international enforcement frameworks. By carefully drafting dispute resolution clauses, maintaining proper documentation, and engaging experienced Belgian counsel, Chinese parties can access dispute resolution mechanisms that effectively protect their commercial interests in the European Union.