In recent days, enforcement judges of Haikou Maritime Court have been continuously tackling difficulties in enforcement with a determined attitude. After putting persistent high pressure on a judgment debtor, we have successfully concluded a non-litigation enforcement case concerning administrative penalty related to the South China Sea.

From August to September 2015, a vessel owned by the judgment debtor, a shipping company in Guangxi, arrived in Xisha Island waters from Haikou and dredged giant clam shells from multiple coral reefs. This caused significant damage to the ecosystem of the South China Sea. The company was caught on the spot by Sansha Fisheries authorities when it was illegally transporting the giant clam shells. Sansha Fisheries authorities duly confiscated the giant clam shells and imposed an administrative fine of CNY 345,600 on the company. After receiving the penalty, the company did not apply for administrative consideration, initiate administrative litigation or go through any other procedures, but did not fulfil its obligations to pay the fine either. Sansha Fisheries authorities thus duly apply to a people’s court for enforcing the administrative penalty. Haikou Maritime Court investigated into the case and duly ruled in favour of the enforcement.

After being served an enforcement notice and an order to report property, the company still defaulted on its obligations and did not report its property. The enforcement judges promptly initiative online and offline inquiry and control measures, such as visiting the bank, land and resources authorities, real estate administration and vehicle management authorities, in order to fully investigate into the judgment debtor’s property. However, they did not find any property that was available for enforcement. The enforcement judges then immediately initiated the cooperative system with maritime safety administration. Through in-depth and meticulous investigation, they managed to track down a vessel owned by the judgment debtor and took prompt actions to arrest the vessel. Meanwhile, the company was put on the List of Dishonest Judgment Debtors and an order on restriction of consumption was imposed on the company and its legal representative on the grounds that it had disobeyed the property reporting order.

The multiple actions and measures taken by the enforcement judges put unprecedented pressure on the judgment debtor. Its legal representative, Huang, was unable to take a flight when he needed to travel from the island for matters of urgency. The company suffered damage to its reputation after being listed as a dishonest judgment debtor. As a result, its application for loans was denied and its business partners also raised doubts. In addition, its vessel in operation was arrested and threatened a huge amount of detention costs. These all gave the judgment debtor a good taste of the serious consequences of defying an effective judgment.

Eventually, the shipping company paid up the fine and assured the judges that it would abide by law in its future operations and would not dare break the law again.