Direct answer

Agreed damages are valid, but Chinese forums can adjust them to actual loss.

The Civil Code lets parties stipulate liquidated damages or a method for calculating loss. If the agreed sum is excessively higher than the loss caused, the breaching party may ask the forum to reduce it; if it is lower than the loss, the innocent party may ask for an increase. In practice, figures far above actual loss—often discussed around a double-loss rule of thumb—face adjustment risk. Evidence of loss still matters even when a clause looks formulaic.

The classification screen

4 questions before you choose the route.

This page identifies the right question and evidence. It does not determine the legal outcome on a reader’s facts.

01

What loss does the clause cover?

Delay, quality, IP leakage, take-or-pay or a general breach each need a different formula.

Scope
02

Is the number a genuine pre-estimate?

Record why the rate was set. A round 30% of contract value with no rationale is fragile.

Rationale
03

Do you also claim actual loss?

Stacking unlimited actual damages on top of a high 违约金 invites adjustment or double recovery arguments.

Stacking
04

Where will it be heard?

Chinese courts are more interventionist on quantum than some foreign arbitral seats.

Forum

Working rule: Map the regulated role before marketing or launch in China.

What changes the answer

The signal ledger.

These facts move the question beyond a label and into a product, money-flow and control analysis.

Signal
Ask the operating question
Why it changes the route
Gap to actual loss
Can you document the true loss, or is the clause doing all the work?
Adjustment turns on the gap between the stipulated sum and proven loss.
Daily delay rate
Is the cap and daily rate commercially related to the project?
Uncapped daily rates that exceed the contract price are frequent reduction targets.
Take-or-pay vs penalty
Is the sum a price for capacity, or a punishment for walking away?
Characterisation changes how a Chinese forum treats the clause.
Prepare before you escalate

Bring a compact evidence docket—not a pitch deck.

Give a compliance team or counsel the operating facts that reveal the perimeter.

01Clause and formulaThe bilingual liquidated-damages text and any cap.
02Pricing rationaleEmails or models showing why the rate was chosen.
03Loss evidenceCover purchases, idle cost, lost profit and mitigation.
04Notices of breachCure notices and the date loss started to run.
Common confusions

Questions people ask before they build.

Short answers for orientation. The right result can change with the service model and current rules.

Is a 30% liquidated-damages clause automatically void?

No. There is no single illegal percentage. The question is whether the sum is excessively higher or lower than the loss on these facts, and whether the forum will adjust it.

Can we say the amount is non-adjustable?

A Chinese court is unlikely to treat that as a complete bar if the Civil Code adjustment mechanism applies. Draft for a defensible pre-estimate instead.

Primary authorities

Reviewed sources support orientation, not a fact-specific assessment.

PRC Civil Code (gov.cn)
National laws database (NPC)
Supreme People’s Court