China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

China Innovates with “Partial Judgment + Interim Injunction” in Patent Infringement - China Legal News

Sun, 24 Jan 2021
Categories: China Legal Trends

avatar

 

The case of Shenzhen Dji Technology Co., Ltd. (2020) tried by Shenzhen IP court marks the first case in China where a “partial judgment with interim injunction" was handed down.

In November 2020, in the case relating to design patent infringement of Shenzhen Dji Technology Co., Ltd. v. Beijing Feimi Technology Co., Ltd. and Beyondsky (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., the Shenzhen Intellectual Property Court (the Court) introduced the mode of “advanced judgment with interim injunction" where the right holder applied for an interim injunction. The Court handed down a advance partial judgment to stop the patent infringement subject to the facts that have been ascertained. The Court issued an interim injunction to promptly stop patent infringement where the first-instance judgment has not yet come into force and has not been enforceable. This is also the first time in China that the mode of “advanced judgment with interim injunction" was adopted in patent cases.

Contributors: Yanru Chen 陈彦茹

Save as PDF

You might also like

China Introduces New Drunk Driving Convictions Standards Effective 2023

In December 2023, China announced updated standards for drunk driving convictions, stating that individuals who drive with a blood alcohol content (BAC) of 80mg/100ml or higher on a breath test may be held criminally liable, according to the recent joint announcement by the Supreme People's Court, Supreme People's Procuratorate, Ministry of Public Security, and Ministry of Justice.

SPC's Revised Rules Extend Reach of International Commercial Courts

In December 2023, China's Supreme People’s Court's newly amended provisions extended the reach of its International Commercial Courts (CICC). To establish a valid choice of court agreement, three requirements must be met - the international nature, the agreement in writing, and the amount in controversy - while the 'actual connection' is no longer required.