How should one legally respond after receiving a 'Notice to Perform Due Debt'?

This is currently one of the most frequently used judicial debt-collection methods targeting debtors—especially over the past year or so. Upon receiving the notice, you should promptly file an objection to enforcement. Do not miss the statutory objection period, which is generally only 15 days (counting from the date you receive the notice until the court receives your objection). If you miss the objection period, in the vast majority of current cases—which often involve improper service—even if the account has already been frozen in enforcement proceedings, you may still file an objection to enforcement to lift the freeze. Do not ignore the notice; proactive and timely response is essential.

Why has the Supreme People’s Court invited chambers of commerce to help resolve the persistent problem of overdue payments? A reading of the second batch of exemplary cases on diversified dispute resolution.

Why Has the Supreme People’s Court Invited Chambers of Commerce to Tackle the Persistent Problem of Overdue Payments? A Reading of the Second Batch of Exemplary Cases on Diversified Dispute Resolution Recovering Overdue Payments Without Resorting to Litigation—The Real Weight of ‘Mediation-First’ and ‘Integration of Litigation and Mediation’ in Disputes over Overdue Corporate Payments Abstract: On October 8, 2026, the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) and the All-China Federation of Industry and Commerce (ACFIC) jointly released the second batch of exemplary cases on diversified dispute resolution in the private economy sector—comprising ten cases focused specifically on resolving overdue corporate payments. These cases implement the major policy deployments of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on clearing overdue payments owed to enterprises, as well as the provisions of the Law on Promoting the Development of the Private Economy concerning the protection of private economic entities’ payment rights. At their core lies a mechanism that leverages the mediation capacity of chambers of commerce: drawing upon deep familiarity with industry-specific trading practices, customary payment cycles, and capital flow patterns, these organizations accurately diagnose the root causes of debt formation and formulate tailored mediation plans—achieving a win-win-win outcome: creditors recover payments, debtors obtain relief, and cooperative business relationships are restored. This article does not recount each case individually; rather, it clarifies one central point: why mediation proves an efficient pathway in disputes involving overdue payments—and where its legal validity and practical value truly lie. Keywords: diversified dispute resolution; chamber-of-commerce mediation; overdue corporate payments; integration of litigation and mediation; judicial confirmation Introduction When a payment for goods remains unpaid, the most immediate instinct is often to file a lawsuit. Yet pursuing litigation may entail costs exceeding the amount owed itself. Time cost is the first hurdle. The litigation process—including filing, service of process, evidence submission, trial hearings, judgment, and enforcement—typically takes several months or even longer. Financial cost is the second hurdle. Litigation fees, property preservation fees, attorney fees, plus the time and energy consumed, mean that recovering even a payment of several hundred thousand yuan may yield net proceeds insufficient to cover recovery expenses. Relational cost is the third hurdle. Contracting parties in sales agreements are often long-term business partners; once they appear before a court, their cooperative relationship is effectively terminated. It is precisely against this backdrop that the value of diversified dispute-resolution mechanisms becomes evident. On October 8, 2026, the Supreme People’s Court and the All-China Federation of Industry and Commerce jointly released the second batch of exemplary cases on diversified dispute resolution in the private economy sector—ten cases focused on overdue corporate payments. The core mechanism embodied in these cases is chamber-of-commerce mediation: entrusting industry insiders—those intimately familiar with sectoral norms—to resolve industry-specific disputes. This article explains why this approach works, where its legal force originates, and what it means in practice for enterprises and lawyers alike. As for the specific handling of each individual case, this article does not recount them one by one. Figure 1 · Core Mechanism of the Second Batch of Exemplary Cases on Diversified Dispute Resolution: From Policy to Implementation Reading Figure 1: The transmission relationship among policy, mechanism, and cases is central to understanding this framework— I. First, clarify the origin and purpose of this batch of cases To assess the significance of a set of exemplary cases, begin by examining how they were generated and what problems they aim to solve. The issuing bodies are the Supreme People’s Court and the All-China Federation of Industry and Commerce. The release date is October 8, 2026. The content comprises the second batch of exemplary cases on diversified dispute resolution in the private economy sector—ten cases, all centered on resolving overdue corporate payments. The designation “second batch” indicates that a first batch was previously issued, confirming that the release of such exemplary cases on diversified dispute resolution has become an institutionalized practice. There are two key policy foundations: First, the important policy deployments of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on clearing overdue payments owed to enterprises.

Payments on Two Debt Series Went Unpaid at Braskem (BAK), Which Cites a Court-Ordered Stay

2 days ago

Braskem S.A. missed R$1.2 billion in debt payments on two debenture series, citing a 120-day court-ordered stay from an extrajudicial reorganization petition. The company reaffirmed its commitment to resolving its capital structure while maintaining operational continuity.

Stock Titan

2026-04-02

Braskem (NYSE: BAK) weighs creditor protection options while reviewing capital structure

2026-04-04

Pomerantz Law Firm Investigates Braskem S.A. Over Investor Claims

2026-04-08

Braskem Reviews Creditor Options as Shareholders Weigh São Paulo Move

2026-04-08

Braskem Clarifies Capital Structure Review and Plans Shareholder Vote on Legal Domicile Change

2026-04-09

Braskem (BAK) Outlines Braskem Idesa Missed Interest Payments and Debt Talks