China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

SPC Issues First Typical Cases of IPR Protection in Seed Industry

Fri, 08 Oct 2021
Categories: China Legal Trends

On 7 Sept. 2021, China’s Supreme People's Court (SPC) released the first batch of 10 typical cases of IPR judicial protection by the court in the seed industry, including disputes over infringement of the right to new plant varieties, administrative disputes over the review of rejected applications for new plant varieties and others.

Among them, the case Huaian Jindi Seeds Industry Technology Co., Ltd. v. Jiangsu Qingengtian Agricultural Industry Development Co., Ltd. for infringement over the right to new plant varieties (江苏省金地种业科技有限公司诉江苏亲耕田农业产业发展有限公司侵害植物新品种权纠纷案)(Nanjing Intermediate People's Court, Jiangsu, (2020) Su 01 Min Chu No. 773, (2020)苏01民初773号), and the SPC, (2021) Zui Gao Fa Zhi Min Zhong No. 816, (2021)最高法知民终816号) determines the nature of the accused infringement under the cover of business entities such as "farmers" and "big farming households" to contact the sale and purchase parties through the information network. The SPC held that Jiangsu Qingengtian Agricultural Industry Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter ‘Qingengtian’) was not a farmer, and the number of seeds involved in the seed sales information it publicized and organized for transactions reached tens of thousands of jins, far exceeding the number and scale of self-propagation and self-use by farmers. Given that Qingengtian released the specific sales information of the infringing seeds, and negotiated with the buyer to determine the packaging method, price, number, and performance period for the transactions, it is determined that the sale contract was concluded in accordance with law. Therefore, as the trading organizer and the decision-maker of selling the infringing seeds, Qingengtian had constituted infringement.

 

 

Cover Photo by Limbo Hoo (https://unsplash.com/@limbolize) on Unsplash

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

Save as PDF

You might also like

Beyond the Memorandum: Shanghai Court Enforces Singapore Judgment by Confirming “Reciprocal Consensus” Under China’s New Framework

On January 8, 2025, the Shanghai International Commercial Court recognized and enforced a Singapore High Court monetary judgment in Zhao v Ye (2023) Hu 01 Xie Wai Ren No. 28. It marks the first judicial confirmation of “reciprocal consensus” between China and Singapore under the 2022 reciprocity criteria, based on the China-Singapore Memorandum of Guidance (MOG).

SPC Issues New Rules for Government Information Disclosure Cases

In May 2025, China's Supreme People's Court (SPC) issued a new judicial interpretation, replacing its 2011 predecessor to standardize adjudication of government information disclosure cases and safeguard citizens' right to know by clarifying trial standards, defendant identification, burden of proof, and preventive relief.

China's Top Court Releases Minor Protection Cases

China's Supreme People's Court (SPC) released five typical cases to strengthen holistic judicial protection for minors, exemplifying the "best interests of the child" principle through integrated criminal, civil, and administrative proceedings.

China Enacts Landmark Private Economy Promotion Law

China enacted its landmark first Private Economy Promotion Law, effective May 20, 2025, to guarantee fair competition, streamline market access via a unified negative list, and bolster private enterprises through financing, innovation, and service support.

China Strengthens Criminal IP Protection with New Rules

In April 2025, China’s top court and procuratorate jointly issued a new judicial interpretation to clarify standards for handling criminal intellectual property infringement cases, aiming to strengthen IP protection, particularly in the service sector.

SPC’s 2024 Typical IP Cases Include AI Face-Swap Ruling

In April 2025, China’s Supreme People’s Court released eight typical IP cases, highlighting judicial responses to emerging issues in AI, gaming, and biotech, including a landmark ruling on AI face-swapping copyright infringement.