Enforcing Foreign Judgments and Arbitral Awards in Macau
As Macau’s economy and legal system become increasingly international, mechanisms for recognising and enforcing foreign court decisions and arbitral awards have gained growing importance. These tools ensure that decisions issued abroad take effect locally, offering legal certainty to those engaged in cross-border activities. For investors, professionals and companies, this predictability fosters trust and sustained cooperation in the region.
• Recognition of Foreign Court Judgments in Macau SAR
Foreign judgments concerning private rights may only produce legal effect in Macau following judicial confirmation, unless an applicable international convention or special law provides otherwise. Where such judgments are submitted merely as evidence in ongoing proceedings, formal confirmation is not required, and the Macau court shall freely assess their probative value.
The court initially examines, on its own initiative, whether the foreign decision is authentic and intelligible. It also verifies whether its confirmation would be incompatible with Macau’s public policy. However, if in the course of the proceedings, or through the exercise of its duties, the court becomes aware that other fundamental conditions are not fulfilled, it may also refuse confirmation even in the absence of opposition by the parties.
These conditions include: (i) that the decision is final under the law of the place where it was issued; (ii) that the foreign court’s jurisdiction was not obtained through fraud and the matter does not fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of Macau’s courts; (iii) that there is no case pending or already decided by a Macau court relatively to the case under litigation, unless the foreign court was the first one to assume jurisdiction; (iv) that the defendant was properly served process under the law of the court of origin and that the principles of adversarial procedure and equal treatment were respected.
Applications for recognition must be filed with the Court of Second Instance (Intermediate Court) and supported by the necessary documentation, including translated and certified copies of the foreign judgment. The defendant must be duly notified and granted 15 days to submit a response, after which the applicant may reply within a further term of 10 days. Decisions may be appealed to the Court of Final Appeal under the general rules.
Overall, Macau courts have developed a consistent practice in recognising judgments from jurisdictions with which the SAR maintains formal or well-established cooperation mechanisms. This includes, in particular, the 1999 Treaty on Judicial Cooperation in Civil and Commercial Matters with Portugal and the 2006 Arrangement with Hong Kong on the Reciprocal Recognition and Enforcement of Civil and Commercial Judgments.
• Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Macau SAR
Macau’s Arbitration Law (Law No. 19/2019) establishes a comprehensive and unified legal framework for both domestic and international arbitration. It applies a nearly uniform regime to all arbitral proceedings seated in Macau, without distinguishing between local and cross-border disputes.
The Arbitration Law is also aligned with China’s 2005 declaration extending the application of the New York Convention to Macau.
In line with that declaration, the law allows for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, setting out specific and limited grounds for refusal that mirror those listed in the Convention. Once recognised by the Court of Second Instance, an arbitral award may be enforced through standard civil procedures by the court of first instance. In addition, arbitral awards continue to be mutually recognised between Macau and Mainland China, pursuant to the Supreme People’s Court Arrangement on Reciprocal Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitration Awards.
The law requires that arbitration covenants be in written form, while adopting a broad and modern interpretation of this requirement. Valid arbitral covenants include: (i) any document signed by the parties; (ii) an exchange of letters, faxes, emails, or other written communications; (iii) electronic, magnetic, optical, or other media offering comparable guarantees of reliability, intelligibility and preservation and (iv) an exchange of statements of claim and defence in which the existence of the arbitration covenants is alleged by one party and not contested by the other.
To address urgent matters, the law allows parties to appoint an emergency arbitrator in their arbitration agreement or in a later arrangement. This mechanism enables urgent interim relief to be granted before the arbitral tribunal is formally constituted, which then assumes jurisdiction once established. The legal framework also governs the issuance and enforcement of interim measures and preliminary orders, including those granted by tribunals seated outside Macau, which are recognised under the same rules as foreign arbitral awards.
The framework also provides a clear procedure for judicial assistance in the taking of evidence. The arbitral tribunal, or any party with the tribunal’s approval, may request the assistance of the courts to obtain evidence. This applies in particular when the production of evidence depends on the cooperation of one of the parties or third parties who refuse to collaborate. The request must indicate the facts that justify it, specify the factual issues to be proven and identify the documents, objects or witnesses to be presented or heard. The judicial court collects the evidence and transmits it to the tribunal. This procedure is considered urgent in nature.
Judicial challenges of arbitral decisions are made through an action of annulment that will only proceed if some limited circumstances ate met as stipulated in Article 69 of the Arbitration Law, and must be instituted either within 3 months after receiving the arbitral decision, or in case a request for rectification/interpretation is lodged, within 3 months after receiving the decision such request.
Finally, the current law permits arbitration in administrative disputes arising from (i) administrative contracts; (ii) the liability of the Public Administration for damages caused by acts of public management and (iii) the protection of subjective rights, or legally recognised interests. In such cases, the arbitral tribunal must apply Macau’s substantive law.
Arbitral awards concerning administrative disputes are disclosed in the online platform of legal Affairs Bureau of the Macau Government.