On the morning of 20 November 2017, we held a judge meeting to discuss whether we had the authority, at the request of an enforcement applicant and by imposing extended attachment and other means, to uphold control measures set out in a judgment not rendered by our court. After being briefed by the person handling the case, the attending judges had a lively discussion about the main issues. They also extended the discussion to the validity of property preservation measures after a suit was dismissed, the handling of clues to a suspected crime found in civil proceedings, and the application of hearing procedure in the enforcement in cases subjected to review due to objection. Jian Wancheng, vice president, put forward three pieces of advice as regards the case as guidance for further discussion: first, considering the long gap between the pre-trial preservation and the arbitration proceedings, it was important to find out the reason and whether it was necessary to continue with the enforcement; second, a written inquiry should be made to Haikou Intermediate People's Court about their grounds for giving the judgment, so that we could follow it through; third, it was important to ascertain the validity of the property attachment imposed by Haikou Intermediate People’s Court and whether it could extend to the arbitration proceedings or even the enforcement stage. The discussion went on for nearly two hours, and attending judges fully expressed their opinions and exchanged advice. As they got a deeper understanding of the issues and gradually reached agreement, the judge meeting achieved the desired results.

Chen Xiangzhi, vice president, stressed that in administering justice all judges had to be prudent in exercising their judicial discretion. They had to think from different perspectives and look deep into each issue, and handle cases strictly in compliance with law and impartially without personal emotions. They should work hard to ensure justice for every individual in every case.