2013-01-07 18:22:42
The Provisions on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Disputes Involving Foreign-invested Enterprises (I) (the Provisions)took effect on August 16 2010.The Provisions address disputes arising during the course of the establishment and modification of foreign invested enterprises ( FIEs), mainly including three aspects: the validity of contracts subject to approval by administrative authorities, remedies for the transferee under the equity transfer situation, and disputes concerning dormant investments.
Article 1 of the Provisions states that if a contract is subject to relevant authorities’approval but it has not been approved, such contract should be determined to be established but not yet entered into effect. The people’s court will reject a party’s request to hold such contract to be invalid. Prior to the issuance of the Provisions, many courts held such contract invalid. Article 1 also provides that the effectiveness of contracts subject to administrative approval shall not affect the validity of the provisions on the relevant party's obligation to submit the contract for approval or the performance by the relevant parties to carry out such obligation.
Article 2 of the Provisions addresses this issue concerning the effectiveness of supplemental agreements. It provides that if the supplementary agreement does not constitute a material or substantive change to contract terms that have been approved by the authorities, the court shall not rule that such supplementary agreement has not come into effect due to its not having been approved. The Provisions provide a wide range of examples for material or substantive change, such as changes in registered capital, corporate type, business scope, term of operation, the capital contributions subscribed for by shareholders, method of capital contribution, as well as corporate mergers and divisions, and equity transfers.
Article 5 to Article 7 of the Provisions stipulate remedies for the transferee when the transferor and the FIE fail to submit the equity transfer for approval.
In practice, dormant investors are not uncommon in FIEs. For the first time, the Supreme People's Court officially provides an approach for dormant shareholders to have their status as shareholders acknowledged, even though the legal standards for such acknowledgment are high. Under Article 14 of the Provisions, the dormant shareholder may request the court to acknowledge his status as shareholder and to petition for a change in the list of shareholders of FIEs if the following conditions are met: 1) he actually has made the investment; 2) registered shareholders other than the nominee shareholder recognise the actual investor's status as a shareholder; and 3) the court or the concerned party has obtained consent from competent authorities for this change of the actual investor into a shareholder while the legal action is pending.
Please read below the Provisions in English & Chinese
Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on
Several Issues concerning the Trial of Disputes Involving Foreign-Funded Enterprises (I)
(Judicial Interpretation No. 9 [2010])
These Provisions are formulated in accordance with General Principles of the Civil Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Real Right Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Company Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Sino-foreign Equity Joint Ventures, the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Sino-foreign Contractual Joint Enterprises, the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Foreign-funded Enterprises and other laws and regulations, and in light of the trial practice for purposes of correctly hearing the disputes arising during the formation, modification, etc. of foreign-funded enterprises and protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the parties concerned.
Article 1 Where a contract concluded during the formation, modification, etc. of a foreign-funded enterprise does not take effect until it is approved by the foreign-funded enterprise examination and approval organ in accordance with the laws and administrative regulations, it shall become effective upon the date of approval. If the contract is not approved, the people’s court shall determine the contract as ineffective. If any party concerned requests the court to determine the contract as invalid, it shall not be upheld by the people’s court.
If a contract as mentioned in the preceding paragraph is determined as ineffective because it is not approved, it does not affect the effectiveness of the clause on the parties’ fulfillment of the obligation of obtaining approval and that of the relevant clauses set for such obligation in the contract.
Article 2 Where a supplemental agreement reached by the parties on the issues concerning a foreign-funded enterprise does not constitute any significant or substantial change to the approved contract, the people’s court shall not determine the supplemental agreement as ineffective on the ground that it has not been approved by the foreign-funded enterprise examination and approval organ.
The term “significant or substantial change” as mentioned in the preceding paragraph shall include changes in registered capital, corporate form, business scope, business term, investment contribution of the shareholders, form of contribution, merger of the company, split of the company, equity transfer, etc.
Article 3 Where, in the trial of a case, a people’s court finds that a foreign-funded enterprise contract approved by the foreign-funded enterprise examination and approval organ falls under any of the circumstances constituting invalid contracts as prescribed in the laws and administrative regulations, it shall determine the contract as invalid. If the contract is under any of the circumstances constituting revocable contracts as prescribed in the laws and administrative regulations, and either party makes a request for revocation of the contract, it shall be upheld by the people’s court.
Article 4 Where it is stipulated in a foreign-funded enterprise contract that a party makes its investment contribution or provides cooperation conditions with a subject matter subject to the alteration registration of ownership, if the subject matter has been delivered to the foreign-funded enterprise for actual use and the party concerned bearing the obligation of handling the alteration registration of ownership has completed the registration within the reasonable time limit as specified by the people’s court, the people’s court shall determine that the said party has fulfilled the obligation of making its contribution or providing the cooperation conditions. If the foreign-funded enterprise or any of its shareholders claims that the said party shall not enjoy the shareholder’s rights and interests, it shall not be upheld by the people’s court.
If the foreign-funded enterprise or any of its shareholders provides evidence to prove that the said party has caused losses to the foreign-funded enterprise due to delay in handling the alteration registration of ownership and pleads for compensation, it shall be upheld by the people’s court.
Article 5 Where, after a contract on the equity transfer of a foreign-funded enterprise is established, the transferor and the foreign-funded enterprise have not fulfilled the obligation of obtaining approval, and failed to do so within the reasonable time limit after being notified by the transferee, if the transferee requests for rescission of the contract and requests the transferor to refund the money it has already paid for the transfer or to compensate for its actual losses as a result of the failure to fulfill the obligation of obtaining approval, it shall be upheld by the people’s court.
Article 6 Where, after a contract on the equity transfer of a foreign-funded enterprise is established, the transferor and the foreign-funded enterprise have not fulfilled the obligation of obtaining approval, if the transferee initiates a lawsuit against the transferor with the foreign-funded enterprise as a third party, and requests the transferor and the foreign-funded enterprise to jointly fulfill the obligation of obtaining approval within a certain time limit, it shall be upheld by the people’s court. If the transferee pleads for obtaining approval on its own when the transferor and the foreign-funded enterprise fail to fulfill the obligation of obtaining approval within the time limit as set by an effective judgment, it shall also be upheld by the people’s court.
If the transferor and the foreign-funded enterprise refuse to fulfill the obligation of obtaining approval within the time limit set by the effective judgment of the people’s court, and the transferee initiates a separate lawsuit pleading for rescission of the contract and compensation for its losses, it shall be upheld by the people’s court. The losses to be compensated for may cover the loss of difference between equity prices, the equity proceeds and other reasonable losses.
Article 7 Where a transferor, foreign-funded enterprise or transferee fails to obtain approval after submitting a contract on the equity transfer of a foreign-funded enterprise to the foreign-funded enterprise examination and approval organ for approval according to Article 6, Paragraph 1, of these Provisions, if the transferee initiates a separate lawsuit and requests the transferor to refund the money it has paid for the transfer, it shall be upheld by the people’s court. If the transferee requests the transferor to compensate for its losses incurred therefrom, the people’s court shall determine whether the transferor shall bear the liability of compensation on the basis of whether it is at fault or not, or determine the specific amount of compensation on the basis of the seriousness of the transferor’s fault.
Article 8 Where it is stipulated in a contract on the equity transfer of a foreign-funded enterprise that the transferor shall not handle the formalities for approval until the transferee has paid for the transfer, if the transferee does not make the payment for equity transfer and fails to do so within a reasonable time limit after being notified by the transferor, and the transferor pleads for rescission of the contract and compensation for the actual losses as a result of delay in payment, it shall be upheld by the people’s court.
Article 9 Where, after a contract on the equity transfer of a foreign-funded enterprise is established, the transferee has not paid for the equity transfer, and the transferor and the foreign-funded enterprise have not fulfilled the obligation of obtaining approval, if the transferor requests the transferee to pay for the equity transfer, the people’s court shall suspend the trial, and order the transferor to go through the approval formalities within a certain time limit. If the contract on equity transfer is approved by the foreign-funded enterprise examination and approval organ, the people’s court shall uphold the claim of the transferor for paying the equity transfer price.
Article 10 Where, after a contract on the equity transfer of a foreign-funded enterprise is established, the transferee has actually participated in the business management of the foreign-funded enterprise and has received proceeds, but the contract has failed to be approved by the foreign-funded enterprise examination and approval organ, if the transferor requests the transferee to exit from the business management of the foreign-funded enterprise and to refund the proceeds it has received from the actual participation in the business management after the relevant cost is deducted, it shall be upheld by the people’s court.
Article 11 A shareholder of either party to a foreign-funded enterprise shall obtain the unanimous consent of all its shareholders when transferring all or some of its equity to a third party other than the existing shareholders, and if any shareholder pleads for revocation of the contract on equity transfer on the ground that it has not agreed to the transfer, it shall be upheld by the people’s court unless:
(1) there is evidence to prove that the shareholder has agreed upon the transfer;
(2) the transferor has sent a written notice on the equity transfer issues, and the shareholder has failed to respond within 30 days upon receipt of the written notice; or
(3) the shareholder neither agrees to the transfer nor purchases the transferred equity.
Article 12 Where a shareholder of either party to a foreign-funded enterprise transfers all or some of its equity to a third party other than any of the existing shareholders, if any other shareholder pleads for revocation of the contract on equity transfer on the ground that its preemptive rights have been infringed upon by the equity transfer, it shall be upheld by the people’s court unless the claim for preemptive right is not exercised within one year from the date on which it knows or should have known the conclusion of the equity transfer contract.
If the transferor or transferee as mentioned in the preceding paragraph requests the court to determine the equity transfer contract as invalid on the ground that the preemptive rights of other shareholders have been infringed upon, the people’s court shall not uphold it.
Article 13 An equity pledge contract concluded between a foreign-funded enterprise’s shareholder and its creditor shall become effective as soon as it is concluded, unless it is otherwise provided for in any law or administrative regulation or it is otherwise stipulated in the contract. The failure to register the right of pledge shall not affect the validity of the equity pledge contract.
If a party alleges that the equity pledge contract is null and void or has not become effective on the ground that it has not been approved by the foreign-funded enterprise examination and approval organ, it shall not be upheld by the people’s court.
If the equity pledge contract has undergone pledge registration under relevant provisions of the Real Right Law, the right of equity pledge shall have been established at the time of registration.
Article 14 Where it is stipulated in a contract that either party makes the actual investment contribution and the other party acts as a nominal shareholder of a foreign-funded enterprise, if the actual investor pleads for confirming its status as shareholder of the foreign-funded enterprise or for changing its status as shareholder of the foreign-funded enterprise, it shall not be upheld by the people’s court unless the following conditions are met concurrently:
(1) the actual investor has actually made investment contribution;
(2) shareholders other than the nominal shareholder have recognized the status of the actual investor as shareholder; and
(3) the people’s court or the party concerned has obtained the approval of the foreign-funded enterprise examination and approval organ for changing the actual investor into a shareholder during the proceedings.
Article 15 If it is stipulated in a contract that either party makes the actual investment contribution and the other party acts as the nominal shareholder of a foreign-funded enterprise, the people’s court shall determine the contract as valid provided that it is not under any of the circumstances regarding invalid contracts as prescribed in laws and administrative regulations. If a party alleges that the contract is null and void or has not become effective only on the ground that it has not been approved by the foreign-funded enterprise examination and approval organ, it shall not be upheld by the people’s court.
If the actual investor requests the nominal shareholder of the foreign-funded enterprise to perform the corresponding obligations as stipulated by both parties, it shall be upheld by the people’s court.
Where both parties do not stipulate the distribution of profits, if the actual investor requests the nominal shareholder of the foreign-funded enterprise to distribute to it the proceeds obtained from the foreign-funded enterprise, it shall be upheld by the people’s court. If the nominal shareholder of the foreign-funded enterprise requests the actual investor to pay necessary remunerations, the people’s court shall give appropriate consideration.
Article 16 Where the nominal shareholder of a foreign-funded enterprise fails to fulfill the contract between it and the actual investor and thereby causes the actual investor’s failure to realize the purposes of the contract, if the actual investor pleads for rescission of the contract, and requests the nominal shareholder of the foreign-funded enterprise to be liable for the breach of the contract, it shall be upheld by the people’s court.
Article 17 If the actual investor directly requests the foreign-funded enterprise to distribute profits or pleads for exercising other rights of a shareholder based on the agreement between it and the nominal shareholder of the foreign-funded enterprise, it shall not be upheld by the people’s court.
Article 18 Where a contract between the actual investor and the nominal investor of a foreign-funded enterprise is determined as void, if the value of the equity held by the nominal shareholder is higher than the actual investment amount, and the actual investor requests the nominal shareholder to refund the investment money and pleads for reasonable distribution of the equity proceeds between both parties on the basis of the actual investment it has made as well as the nominal shareholder’s participation in the business management of the foreign-funded enterprise, it shall be upheld by the people’s court.
If the nominal shareholder of a foreign-funded enterprise explicitly expresses its waiver of the equity or refuses to continue to hold the equity, the people’s court may order refunding the investment money to the actual investor from the income obtaining from the auction or sale of the equity held by the nominal shareholder in the foreign-funded enterprise, and the remaining money shall be reasonably distributed between both parties on the basis of the actual investment made by the actual investor as well as the nominal shareholder’s participation in the business management of the foreign-funded enterprise.
Article 19 Where a contract between the actual investor and the nominal shareholder of a foreign-funded enterprise is determined as void, if the value of the equity held by the nominal shareholder is lower than the actual investment amount, and the actual investor requests the nominal shareholder to refund the money equivalent to the price of the existing equity, it shall be upheld by the people’s court. If the nominal shareholder of the foreign-funded enterprise explicitly expresses its waiver of the equity or refuses to continue to hold the equity, the people’s court may order refunding the investment money to the actual investor from the income obtaining from the auction or sale of the equity held by the nominal shareholder in the foreign-funded enterprise.
Where the actual investor requests the nominal shareholder to compensate for its losses, the people’s court shall determine whether the nominal shareholder shall assume the liability for compensation and the specific amount of compensation on the basis of whether the nominal shareholder is at fault or not for the invalidity of the contract, and the seriousness of fault, if at all.
Article 20 If a contract between the actual investor and the nominal shareholder of a foreign-funded enterprise has damaged any of the interests of the state, collectivity or a third party due to malicious collusion and is determined as void, the people’s court shall turn over the property obtained therefrom to the state or return it to the collectivity or the third party.
Article 21 Where a shareholder of either party to a foreign-funded enterprise or a foreign-funded enterprise applies to the foreign-funded enterprise examination and approval organ for changing a shareholder as stated in the foreign-funded enterprise approval certificate by submitting false materials or by any other fraudulent or improper means, which has led to the loss of any shareholder of the other party to the foreign-funded enterprise to lose its shareholder’s status or its original equity share, if the shareholder of the other party pleads for confirming its shareholder’s status or the original equity share, it shall be upheld by the people’s court, unless the third party has obtained the equity in good faith.
If the shareholder of the other party requests the shareholder infringing upon its right or the foreign-funded enterprise to compensate for its losses, it shall be upheld by the people’s court.
Article 22 The people’s court shall analogically apply these Provisions to the disputes arising from the formation of enterprises in the Mainland by investors from Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Macao Special Administrative Region, and Taiwan Region, and by Chinese citizens who are overseas permanent residents.
Article 23 As to a case which is still under the first or second instance trial after these Provisions come into force, these Provisions shall apply. As to a case for which a final judgment has been made before these Provisions come into force, if the people’s court retries the case, these Provisions shall not apply.
Article 24 Where there is any discrepancy between the relevant judicial interpretations made by this Court before these Provisions come into force and these Provisions, these Provisions shall prevail.
最高人民法院关于审理外商投资企业纠纷案件若干问题的规定（一）?
（2010年5月17日最高人民法院审判委员会第1487次会议通过）
为正确审理外商投资企业在设立、变更等过程中产生的纠纷案件，保护当事人的合法权益，根据《中华人民共和国民法通则》、《中华人民共和国合同法》、《中华人民共和国物权法》、《中华人民共和国公司法》、《中华人民共和国中外合资经营企业法》、《中华人民共和国中外合作经营企业法》、《中华人民共和国外资企业法》等法律法规的规定，结合审判实践，制定本规定。
第一条 当事人在外商投资企业设立、变更等过程中订立的合同，依法律、行政法规的规定应当经外商投资企业审批机关批准后才生效的，自批准之日起生效；未经批准的，人民法院应当认定该合同未生效。当事人请求确认该合同无效的，人民法院不予支持。
前款所述合同因未经批准而被认定未生效的，不影响合同中当事人履行报批义务条款及因该报批义务而设定的相关条款的效力。
第二条 当事人就外商投资企业相关事项达成的补充协议对已获批准的合同不构成重大或实质性变更的，人民法院不应以未经外商投资企业审批机关批准为由认定该补充协议未生效。
前款规定的重大或实质性变更包括注册资本、公司类型、经营范围、营业期限、股东认缴的出资额、出资方式的变更以及公司合并、公司分立、股权转让等。
第三条 人民法院在审理案件中，发现经外商投资企业审批机关批准的外商投资企业合同具有法律、行政法规规定的无效情形的，应当认定合同无效；该合同具有法律、行政法规规定的可撤销情形，当事人请求撤销的，人民法院应予支持。
第四条 外商投资企业合同约定一方当事人以需要办理权属变更登记的标的物出资或者提供合作条件，标的物已交付外商投资企业实际使用，且负有办理权属变更登记义务的一方当事人在人民法院指定的合理期限内完成了登记的，人民法院应当认定该方当事人履行了出资或者提供合作条件的义务。外商投资企业或其股东以该方当事人未履行出资义务为由主张该方当事人不享有股东权益的，人民法院不予支持。
外商投资企业或其股东举证证明该方当事人因迟延办理权属变更登记给外商投资企业造成损失并请求赔偿的，人民法院应予支持。
第五条 外商投资企业股权转让合同成立后，转让方和外商投资企业不履行报批义务，经受让方催告后在合理的期限内仍未履行，受让方请求解除合同并由转让方返还其已支付的转让款、赔偿因未履行报批义务而造成的实际损失的，人民法院应予支持。
第六条 外商投资企业股权转让合同成立后，转让方和外商投资企业不履行报批义务，受让方以转让方为被告、以外商投资企业为第三人提起诉讼，请求转让方与外商投资企业在一定期限内共同履行报批义务的，人民法院应予支持。受让方同时请求在转让方和外商投资企业于生效判决确定的期限内不履行报批义务时自行报批的，人民法院应予支持。
转让方和外商投资企业拒不根据人民法院生效判决确定的期限履行报批义务，受让方另行起诉，请求解除合同并赔偿损失的，人民法院应予支持。赔偿损失的范围可以包括股权的差价损失、股权收益及其他合理损失。
第七条 转让方、外商投资企业或者受让方根据本规定第六条第一款的规定就外商投资企业股权转让合同报批，未获外商投资企业审批机关批准，受让方另行起诉，请求转让方返还其已支付的转让款的，人民法院应予支持。受让方请求转让方赔偿因此造成的损失的，人民法院应根据转让方是否存在过错以及过错大小认定其是否承担赔偿责任及具体赔偿数额。
第八条 外商投资企业股权转让合同约定受让方支付转让款后转让方才办理报批手续，受让方未支付股权转让款，经转让方催告后在合理的期限内仍未履行，转让方请求解除合同并赔偿因迟延履行而造成的实际损失的，人民法院应予支持。
第九条 外商投资企业股权转让合同成立后，受让方未支付股权转让款，转让方和外商投资企业亦未履行报批义务，转让方请求受让方支付股权转让款的，人民法院应当中止审理，指令转让方在一定期限内办理报批手续。该股权转让合同获得外商投资企业审批机关批准的，对转让方关于支付转让款的诉讼请求，人民法院应予支持。
第十条 外商投资企业股权转让合同成立后，受让方已实际参与外商投资企业的经营管理并获取收益，但合同未获外商投资企业审批机关批准，转让方请求受让方退出外商投资企业的经营管理并将受让方因实际参与经营管理而获得的收益在扣除相关成本费用后支付给转让方的，人民法院应予支持。
第十一条 外商投资企业一方股东将股权全部或部分转让给股东之外的第三人，应当经其他股东一致同意，其他股东以未征得其同意为由请求撤销股权转让合同的，人民法院应予支持。具有以下情形之一的除外：
（一）有证据证明其他股东已经同意；
（二）转让方已就股权转让事项书面通知，其他股东自接到书面通知之日满三十日未予答复；
（三）其他股东不同意转让，又不购买该转让的股权。
第十二条 外商投资企业一方股东将股权全部或部分转让给股东之外的第三人，其他股东以该股权转让侵害了其优先购买权为由请求撤销股权转让合同的，人民法院应予支持。其他股东在知道或者应当知道股权转让合同签订之日起一年内未主张优先购买权的除外。
前款规定的转让方、受让方以侵害其他股东优先购买权为由请求认定股权转让合同无效的，人民法院不予支持。
第十三条 外商投资企业股东与债权人订立的股权质押合同，除法律、行政法规另有规定或者合同另有约定外，自成立时生效。未办理质权登记的，不影响股权质押合同的效力。
当事人仅以股权质押合同未经外商投资企业审批机关批准为由主张合同无效或未生效的，人民法院不予支持。
股权质押合同依照物权法的相关规定办理了出质登记的，股权质权自登记时设立。
第十四条 当事人之间约定一方实际投资、另一方作为外商投资企业名义股东，实际投资者请求确认其在外商投资企业中的股东身份或者请求变更外商投资企业股东的，人民法院不予支持。同时具备以下条件的除外：
（一）实际投资者已经实际投资；
（二）名义股东以外的其他股东认可实际投资者的股东身份；
（三）人民法院或当事人在诉讼期间就将实际投资者变更为股东征得了外商投资企业审批机关的同意。
第十五条 合同约定一方实际投资、另一方作为外商投资企业名义股东，不具有法律、行政法规规定的无效情形的，人民法院应认定该合同有效。一方当事人仅以未经外商投资企业审批机关批准为由主张该合同无效或者未生效的，人民法院不予支持。
实际投资者请求外商投资企业名义股东依据双方约定履行相应义务的，人民法院应予支持。
双方未约定利益分配，实际投资者请求外商投资企业名义股东向其交付从外商投资企业获得的收益的，人民法院应予支持。外商投资企业名义股东向实际投资者请求支付必要报酬的，人民法院应酌情予以支持。
第十六条 外商投资企业名义股东不履行与实际投资者之间的合同，致使实际投资者不能实现合同目的，实际投资者请求解除合同并由外商投资企业名义股东承担违约责任的，人民法院应予支持。
第十七条 实际投资者根据其与外商投资企业名义股东的约定，直接向外商投资企业请求分配利润或者行使其他股东权利的，人民法院不予支持。
第十八条 实际投资者与外商投资企业名义股东之间的合同被认定无效，名义股东持有的股权价值高于实际投资额，实际投资者请求名义股东向其返还投资款并根据其实际投资情况以及名义股东参与外商投资企业经营管理的情况对股权收益在双方之间进行合理分配的，人民法院应予支持。
外商投资企业名义股东明确表示放弃股权或者拒绝继续持有股权的，人民法院可以判令以拍卖、变卖名义股东持有的外商投资企业股权所得向实际投资者返还投资款，其余款项根据实际投资者的实际投资情况、名义股东参与外商投资企业经营管理的情况在双方之间进行合理分配。
第十九条 实际投资者与外商投资企业名义股东之间的合同被认定无效，名义股东持有的股权价值低于实际投资额，实际投资者请求名义股东向其返还现有股权的等值价款的，人民法院应予支持；外商投资企业名义股东明确表示放弃股权或者拒绝继续持有股权的，人民法院可以判令以拍卖、变卖名义股东持有的外商投资企业股权所得向实际投资者返还投资款。
实际投资者请求名义股东赔偿损失的，人民法院应当根据名义股东对合同无效是否存在过错及过错大小认定其是否承担赔偿责任及具体赔偿数额。
第二十条 实际投资者与外商投资企业名义股东之间的合同因恶意串通，损害国家、集体或者第三人利益，被认定无效的，人民法院应当将因此取得的财产收归国家所有或者返还集体、第三人。
第二十一条 外商投资企业一方股东或者外商投资企业以提供虚假材料等欺诈或者其他不正当手段向外商投资企业审批机关申请变更外商投资企业批准证书所载股东，导致外商投资企业他方股东丧失股东身份或原有股权份额，他方股东请求确认股东身份或原有股权份额的，人民法院应予支持。第三人已经善意取得该股权的除外。
他方股东请求侵权股东或者外商投资企业赔偿损失的，人民法院应予支持。
第二十二条 人民法院审理香港特别行政区、澳门特别行政区、台湾地区的投资者、定居在国外的中国公民在内地投资设立企业产生的相关纠纷案件，参照适用本规定。
第二十三条 本规定施行后，案件尚在一审或者二审阶段的，适用本规定；本规定施行前已经终审的案件，人民法院进行再审时，不适用本规定。
第二十四条 本规定施行前本院作出的有关司法解释与本规定相抵触的，以本规定为准。