Institutional divergence in bills of lading: reconciling China’s predominantly real-right approach with prevailing global practice

China’s judicial practice regarding the bill of lading (B/L) diverges from the prevailing global practice. While the latter generally treats the B/L as a document of title representing constructive possession of the goods, Chinese courts have adopted a dual-attribute approach under which a B/L may represent a contractual right and/or a real right (ownership or security interest). This practice-oriented study, based on an empirical analysis of 49 court judgments, demonstrates that the real-right adjudicative pathway accounts for the majority of cases. Building on this finding, the paper argues that the dual-attribute approach functions as a judicial compensatory mechanism that absorbs the institutional friction arising from this divergence, producing commercial outcomes that appear broadly comparable to those in other jurisdictions. However, the compensation comes at a cost of reduced efficiency, increased uncertainty, and higher institutional burdens, which remained largely invisible in the paper-based era. Trade digitalization and the forthcoming implementation of the United Nations Convention on Negotiable Cargo Documents (NCD Convention) are now rendering these previously low-visibility costs more apparent and less sustainable. The current compensatory mechanism faces growing difficulties in a high-speed digital environment and may hinder the smooth operation of NCDs. The paper therefore proposes that China leverage the domestic implementation of the NCD Convention as an opportunity for judicial adjustment toward a more internationally aligned, possession-based understanding of negotiable documents. This would contribute to greater institutional coherence in cross-border maritime trade and support the sustainable development of the global blue economy.