Yes, answers a local court in Beijing in Liang v. Huifa Zhengxin Technology Co., Ltd. (2021), determining that publication and reproduction of the judgment containing the litigants’ names and facts are not considered a violation of privacy.
Collection of China's Judgments 中国法院经典案例选
In September 2020, a conduct preservation order as equivalent to anti-suit injunctions was issued by a Shenzhen court in ZTE v. Conversant (2018), restraining Conversant from applying to the German court to enforce the German judgment.
Yes, Peppa Pig is a well-known trademark in China and enjoys cross-category protection, says a Shanghai court in the case of Entertainment One UK Limited (2019).
To Obey, Or Not to Obey? A Chinese court skilfully stated that it did not consider unrecognized foreign injunctions in the case of Shenzhen Hongshang Leather Products Co. Ltd. (2017).
Foreign investors can request the court to confirm their shareholder status, as shown in Carson Junping Cheng v. Shanghai Niuxinda Import & Export Co., Ltd.(2020), addressing a typical need after China’s Foreign Investment Law lifts certain restrictions.
The damages of more than USD 20 million indicate the Chinese court's determination to strengthen judicial protection for IP rights.
"No", answers a Shenzhen court in Gao v. Shenzhen Yunsilu Innovation Development Fund Enterprise (2018), ruling to set aside an arbitral award on the ground of public policy, given that cryptocurrency exchanges are banned in China.
Bitcoin is protected as a virtual asset under Chinese law, but shall not be deemed as currency or financial product, as a Shanghai court decided in Li et. al. v. Yan et. al. (2019).