China Limitation Periods: Time Limits for Commercial Claims and How to Protect Them

The following is general information on PRC limitation periods, not legal advice for any specific claim. The applicable period depends on the governing relationship and the facts; consult qualified counsel before acting.

The baseline: three years, twenty years

The general limitation period in China is three years, under Article 188 of the Civil Code, running from the day the claimant knew or should have known that its rights were infringed and who the obligor is. Separately, no protection is available more than twenty years after the infringement, unless a court extends it in special circumstances. The three-year clock is the one that decides most commercial claims — and it is easy to misread when it starts, because "should have known" is judged by what a reasonable party in the claimant's position would have discovered.

Interruption: the clock restarts

Article 195 lists what interrupts the period and restarts it: the claimant demands performance from the obligor; the obligor agrees to perform; the claimant files a lawsuit or applies for arbitration; or another circumstance with equivalent effect. In commercial collections the practical form of a "demand" — a written notice, an email, a reconciliation statement — is often the cheapest way to restart the clock, which is why proof of the demand matters as much as the demand itself. Once interrupted, the period begins again from the interruption.

Suspension: the clock pauses

Article 194 suspends the running of the period where the claimant cannot act — force majeure, an incapacitated person without a guardian, an estate or succession not yet settled, or the claimant being controlled by the obligor or others. When the obstacle is removed, the period resumes and the claim must be brought within six months. Suspension is narrower than interruption and does not reset the period; it only pauses it, so a claimant should treat it as a grace window, not a fresh start.

Special periods that override the three years

Not every claim gets three years. Article 594 of the Civil Code gives disputes over international sale-of-goods contracts and technology import-export contracts a four-year period. Other statutes set their own limits — for example, the Insurance Law gives five years for life-insurance benefits. The rule of thumb for a cross-border claimant: identify the governing relationship first, because a special period overrides the general one, and the wrong starting assumption can be fatal.

Protecting the clock in practice

• Calendar the start date: the period runs from when you knew or should have known of the breach and the counterparty — not from when you got around to it.
• Send written demands and keep proof: a demand restarts the three-year period under Article 195, so evidence of delivery is the point.
• Record acknowledgements: an obligor's written agreement to perform also interrupts the period.
• Check for a special period: Article 594's four-year rule, or an industry statute, before assuming three years.
• Do not rely on the twenty-year backstop: it is a ceiling, not a target — and it can be extended only in special circumstances.

The summary above is general information current as of the date of writing; article numbers and judicial practice should be confirmed against the current official texts. For the evidence you will need once a claim is filed, see Evidence Rules in Chinese Commercial Litigation, and for how a breach claim is framed see China Contract Disputes: Breach, Termination and Damages. Our Dispute Resolution practice handles the full lifecycle.