Recently, the Maritime Division of Guangzhou Maritime Court (GZMC) solved the difficulty in the service of instruments upon a foreign corporation and successfully mediated the case in accordance with the Special Maritime Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, demonstrating the success of oriental practices in resolving commercial disputes. 

On April 28, 2022, GZMC accepted two cases, in which the plaintiff was the Shipping Insurance Operation Center of PICC Property and Casualty Company Limited (PICC P&C) and the defendants were Caterpillar Inc., Caterpillar (China) Investment Co., Ltd. ("Caterpillar China") and Guangzhou Wenchong Shipyard Co. Ltd. The cases primarily involved a product quality liability dispute in which the insurer, after settling compensation, exercised recourse against the shipbuilder as well as the manufacturer and seller of the marine engine with regard to the faulty marine engines produced by Caterpillar Inc. 

The court faced a difficulty in the service of the instruments at the very beginning. Caterpillar Inc. was an American corporation and its address for service was unclear; thus, ordinary service by mail was infeasible. For service by diplomatic means, a minimum of 180 days was needed even if the service could be successful, as shown by judicial practices. To solve the issue, GZMC identified Caterpillar China as the business agent of Caterpillar Inc. according to the laws after finding out that the latter was the de facto controller of the former and understanding the shareholding status and the scope of business of Caterpillar China. According to Article 80(2) of the Special Maritime Procedure Law of China, the service of instruments in maritime actions is governed by the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, and such instruments can be served on the representative office or branch established in China by the person on whom the instrument is to be served, or on the business agent appointed by the person on whom the instrument is to be served. Relevant instruments were deemed to be served upon Caterpillar Inc. when they were served on Caterpillar China by GZMC in accordance with the laws. Both Caterpillar Inc. and Caterpillar China objected to the service of instruments on Caterpillar China being deemed to be served on Caterpillar Inc. Caterpillar China filed a written opinion thereon and raised an objection to the jurisdiction and listing Caterpillar Inc. as a defendant.  The Guangdong Provincial High Court ruled on the jurisdictional objection and held that GZMC had jurisdiction over the aforementioned two cases and continued to hear the cases. 

On February 21, 2023, GZMC convened a pre-hearing meeting of the parties. The plaintiff, Caterpillar China, and the agent ad litem of Wenchong Shipyard participated in the meeting, and Caterpillar Inc., which was subpoenaed by GZMC, failed to attend the meeting. During the meeting, GZMC organized the exchange of evidence and examination of the evidence presented, and the parties fully expressed their examination opinions. After the pre-hearing meeting, the lawyer representing Caterpillar China said that they deeply appreciated the professional quality and skills of the judges of GZMC through the meeting, and said that they would contact Caterpillar Inc. and communicated to Caterpillar Inc. what happened in the meeting and the mediation proposal of the judge. After that, the lawyer representing Caterpillar China gave feedback that Caterpillar Inc. was willing to accept the mediation. Thanks to the organizational efforts of Judge Xie Huicheng, the plaintiff and Caterpillar Inc., after several rounds of negotiations, reached a settlement agreement, by which Caterpillar Inc. made a certain amount of payment to the plaintiff to settle all the disputes, and Caterpillar China and Wenchong Shipyard were not held responsible. On May 8, 2023, the parties signed the settlement agreement and the paper of civil mediation served by the court.