Interviews
#10QuestionswithMaxwell Interview Series: Fei Ning, Hui Zhong Law Firm
In this #10QuestionsWithMaxwell interview, we feature Fei Ning, Managing Partner at Hui Zhong Law Firm, based in Singapore.
Fei Ning is a leading figure in international arbitration, specializing in complex commercial disputes across multiple industries. As the Managing Partner of Hui Zhong Law Firm, he has over 30 years of experience acting as both counsel and arbitrator in high-stakes cases before major arbitral institutions, including CIETAC, HKIAC, SIAC, ICC, and DIAC. His expertise spans cross-border disputes, investment arbitration, and enforcement proceedings, making him a highly regarded authority in the field.
Beyond his practice, Fei has played a pivotal role in shaping China’s arbitration landscape and strengthening its global integration. He was the first mainland Chinese individual to serve on the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) Council and currently holds leadership roles, including Vice-Chair of the ICC Belt and Road Commission and a Governing Board Member of ICCA.
In this interview, Fei Ning shares his insights into the firm’s expansion into Singapore and the evolution of China’s arbitration landscape.
Read the full interview below:
Q: What inspired you to specialize in international arbitration?
Since joining CIETAC in 1988, I started to understand foreign-related arbitrations better. At that time, CIETAC was the only arbitration institution in China that accepted foreign-related arbitration cases. As a tribunal secretary, I had ample opportunities to assist arbitrators (the best and top legal professionals, professors, retired judges, etc. at home and abroad at that time) in handling foreign-related cases, and I benefited a lot from that experience.
After changing my career to become a professional lawyer in 1993, I continued to handle many foreign-related arbitration cases as an arbitration lawyer and gained extensive knowledge with rules that differed from that of domestic arbitration, especially when working with international lawyers. It has greatly enriched my knowledge and understanding of arbitration business and further deepened my interest in international arbitration business. Even after more than 30 years in the industry, the more cases I do, the more I feel that there is no end to learning.
Q: With your extensive experience in both Chinese and international arbitration, what are your thoughts on the evolution of China’s arbitration landscape over the years, and how do you see it continuing to change, particularly in its integration into the global arbitration community?
In 1987, China acceded to the New York Convention, and in 1995, the Chinese Arbitration Law came into force. These two important milestones mark the beginning of Chinese arbitration coming closer to the hallmarks of international arbitration. China’s arbitration has shifted from administrative arbitration to civil arbitration; From a non-final and binding decision to a final and binding decision. Through nearly 30 years of practice, China’s commercial arbitration has made great progress.
At present, there are nearly 280 arbitral institutions in China, of which nearly 10% of the top arbitral institutions are getting closer and closer to the established international arbitral institutions in their rulemaking and arbitration practice, such as ICC, HKIAC, SIAC, etc. At present, China’s legislature is making the first revision of the Arbitration Law, which has been in force for nearly 30 years, and it can be seen from the draft amendments that have been published for public comment that China’s foreign-related arbitration should move closer to the practice of international arbitration.
China’s arbitral institutions should be clearly defined as non-profit civil arbitral institutions; China’s arbitration market will also gradually open up to international arbitral institutions; The support of the Chinese legal institutions such as the judiciary for arbitration will be further strengthened; The rules for the review of arbitral awards will also be clearer, more transparent, consistent and predictable.
Of course, it must be admitted that there are currently too many arbitral institutions in China, and there exists many differences in their actual operations. There are also considerable differences in the level of understanding of the nature of arbitration. Many arbitral institutions have not completely and thoroughly separated themselves from local governments, the quality and levels of professionalism of arbitrators vary greatly, most arbitral institutions and most arbitrators have not yet reached the level that can be compared with international arbitral institutions and international arbitration professionals, and at the same time, the proportion of professionals who can really work with international arbitrators or represent international arbitration cases as lawyers in international arbitral institutions is still very low nationwide.
These aspects will be challenges for the internationalization of arbitration in China. Nevertheless, while the professionalization and internationalization of arbitration in China is an inevitable trend, it will still need a lot of hard work and will take time.
Q: Can you share a memorable experience or case from your career that significantly impacted your approach to arbitration?
In terms of my personal experience, it is difficult to say that there is any case that impacted my approach to arbitration. However, my passion and dedication to arbitration started as a tribunal secretary, and gradually I got to know and deepen my knowledge, understanding, and passion for arbitration. After having had the opportunity to handle cases administered by different international arbitral institutions, particularly through engaging in the different procedures available in the arbitration process such as document disclosure, witness cross-examination and other professional and technical requirements in international arbitration cases, I have become more aware of the importance and necessity of staying professional when conducting arbitration.
Q: What notable global trends have you observed in international arbitration, and how do you think these trends are impacting arbitration practices in China?
Judging from the global trends in international arbitration, improving efficiency, reducing costs, and designing or establishing arbitration procedural rules that coordinate the handling of complex, multi-contract or multi-party arbitration should be the focus of the future development of arbitration. China’s current arbitration practice also faces these problems.
Some leading arbitral institutions in China are also learning from the practice of international arbitral institutions, and are revising, formulating and introducing the latest arbitration practices and rules, such as the emergency arbitrator system, the arbitration rules for the consolidation of multiple contracts, the multi-party arbitration rules, and so on. In short, arbitration is a legal service whose purpose is to provide arbitration parties with efficient and reasonable cost arbitration services that are suitable for their business transaction models. China is no exception.
Q: What advice would you give to young Chinese arbitrators looking to expand their practice internationally and establish themselves in the global arbitration landscape?
Learn more, observe more, and participate more. Through actual practice gathering more experience, young Chinese arbitrators can better understand and compare the similarities and differences between Chinese arbitration and international arbitration. One must adopt an open-minded and long-term view. Regardless of whether it is the common law system or the civil law system, both arbitration practices have their own unique characteristics, and young Chinese arbitrators must learn to draw from the strengths of one system to make up for the weaknesses of the other. At the end of the day, arbitration at its very core is but a procedure, a set of rules for a game. So, one must learn to get to know the process, learn the rules of the game, and eventually master and use it.
Q: Congratulations on the expansion of Hui Zhong to Singapore. What made you decide to setup an office in Singapore, and how do you see the office contributing to the firm’s regional and global presence?
The Singapore office is Hui Zhong’s second overseas office outside of mainland China. In the past few years, the Singapore government has put in a lot of effort to build Singapore as an international dispute resolution hub, whether it is in terms of policy, the law, or even financial resources.
Singapore has now become a hotspot for commercial dispute resolution in Southeast Asia. Every year, SIAC, ICC, ICSID, and Singapore International Commercial Court (“SICC”) will probably have more than 100 commercial, investment and other disputes related to Chinese enterprises heard in Singapore, or involving Chinese enterprises, or applying Chinese laws.
Therefore, it is reasonable to foresee that the legal market in Singapore is in considerable demand for Chinese lawyers familiar with the Chinese culture and with a Chinese legal background. As a professional boutique firm with dispute resolution as its core business, there should be good room and opportunities for development in Singapore. With a foothold in China, but with a global outlook, Singapore will become a very important regional office for Hui Zhong in Southeast Asia.
Q: Specifically, which practice areas or industry sectors do you plan to prioritize?
We do not plan to engage in local legal practice in Singapore; our sights are set on international commercial arbitration, investment arbitration, and appearances before the SICC as the main areas of practice for Hui Zhong in Singapore.
Q: What has been the most rewarding aspect in your career, and what keeps you motivated?
Personally, I believe that a lawyer is a profession, a professional. But more colloquially, he is a craftsman. As a craftsman, it should be the highest pursuit of a craftsman to make his own works into works of art in this field based on his own skills and professional ability. As a craftsman, a lawyer should do his best to do the best in the cases he handles. A lawyer is not a judge or arbitrator and cannot decide the outcome of the case – win or lose.
However, I believe that a lawyer should always persevere to give his/her best to a case and leave nothing to regret, this should be something a lawyer should always strive towards. So, for me, the biggest reward and satisfaction is the recognition of my work by the client. Even if the case is lost, the parties will not blame me for not being dedicated, trying my best and being responsible. As a craftsman, you will never get bored of your work, and as a good litigation lawyer, the best case is always the next one!
Q: To get to know you on a more personal level, tell us 3 interesting facts about yourself that people don’t know.
As a litigator, our daily job is to speak and deal with people. To speak to the parties, to speak in court and before the arbitral tribunal. It is necessary to be good at dealing with all the parties involved in the case, and to be able to speak to and coordinate with various relevant departments etc. It is natural for one to then assume that we must be good at expressing ourselves, be good at communication and be able to say the right things at the right time, place and occasion, and do the right things.
But in my personal life, I am an introvert who does not like to talk and socialize – to the point where I think I may have social phobia! I don’t like going to crowded places, or socialising at a party, and I don’t usually take the initiative to go up to strangers and make new friends in life. On non-working days, I like to hole up at home and read, watch quality movies, and enjoy delicious food with two or three good friends. My personal life is quite simple and boring.
Q: If you weren’t in your current position, what would you be in?
It may be because of my personality, I tend to be more serious when it comes to doing things, and I like challenges. I tend to question things, and I like to do things thoroughly. Therefore, if I weren’t a lawyer, I would probably be a craftsman in other fields given that I like to do pursue perfection.
From left to right: Fei Ning travelling in the Republic of Latvia, Enjoying good food with the family, and Golfing with professional friends in Thailand.
