Beijing Intellectual Property Court (Beijing IP Court) held its
one-year anniversary press conference on November 9, at which the
Court gave a summary report on its work in the past year and
released information on 12 typical IP cases the Court has tried
that involve patent, trademark, copyright, unfair competition, and
preservation of evidence.
Beijing IP Court established on November 6, 2014 is China's
first intellectual property court. The Court has heard and ruled on
a large number of difficult, complex and landmark cases in the past
year. As of November 6 this year, Beijing IP Court has accepted
7,918 cases, of which 6,699 cases are in first instance
proceedings, 1,204 cases are in second instance proceedings, and 15
cases are in retrial phase. Of the 3,250 cases concluded as of
November 6 this year, 1,200 are civil cases and 2,050 are
administrative cases. Of the 2,050 concluded administrative
litigation cases, 179 involve patent and 1,871 involve trademark,
on which decisions of the Patent Re-examination Board were
overturned in 11 cases, and decisions of the Trademark Review and
Adjudication Board were overturned in 269 cases, representing a
overturn rate of 6.1% and 14.4% respectively. The Court's
performance strengthens the judicial review over administrative
actions, while advancing the regulation regarding patent and
As a leader in the trials of intellectual property disputes and
a pioneer in the reform of judicial system, Beijing IP Court has
embarked innovations and explorations in many aspects as specified
1. The Court adopts categorized personnel management system that
stresses division of labor and specialization where relatively
fixed trial teams comprising a judge + an assistant + a clerk are
2. The Court eliminates the conventional case reporting and
approval system to remove the influence of the administration in
judicial adjudication, thereby ensuring the judicial independence
of the collegial panel. If the collegial panel runs into
challenging questions when trying a case, it has the option to seek
the advice of the judges meeting or the research team.
3. For particularly difficult cases, the Court leads the country
by asking all members of the adjudication committee to jointly and
directly try a case. On September 17 this year, all seven members
of the adjudication committee of Beijing IP Court heard an
administrative trademark dispute case together.
4. The Court attempts to add a "Case Summary" section
before the text of the judgment. In a few cases, the Court
creatively includes the dissenting opinion in the judgment.
5. The Court explores the practice of technical investigator
system and improves the expert witness system. By the end of
October this year, Beijing IP Court has appointed 37 technical
investigation clerks and 27 technical experts to enhance fact
finding in patent cases.
6. The Court normalizes the practice of trial by court leaders
and tribunal directors with the establishment of a "Court
Leader Hearing Week" system. In the past year, three leaders
of the Court heard 197 cases and made ruling on 96 cases, while
four tribunal directors of the Court tried 455 cases and made
ruling on 282 cases, and concluded cases decided by court leaders
and tribunal directors accounted for 10% of all concluded cases of
7. The Court establishes a dynamic mechanism for adjusting the
number of judges. The Court had 18 judges at the time of
establishment who on average were assigned 400 cases each and made
ruling on 159 cases in the past year. Apparently all judges have
extremely heavy workload. To relieve the work pressure of judges
and ensure judicial efficiency, the Court appoints another 20
judges on September 29 this year.
8. The Court fully utilizes external resources to enhance the
administrative services of the Court. It recruits graduate students
as volunteers to provide consulting, guidance and assistance
services. It also works with the law schools of Peking University,
Tsinghua University and other universities to bring in graduate
students as intern judge assistants and draw outstanding scholars
to participate in research projects.
Originally published 30th November 2015
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
This article enunciates the recent, much awaited, and landmark judgment delivered on September 16, 2016 by Hon'ble Delhi High Court throwing light on the important provisions of the Copyright Act, 1962.
Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion recently issued an office memorandum pursuant to receiving representations from various stakeholders for guidance with respect to the applicability of the provisions of Section 31D of the Copyright Act, 1957.
An Invention Disclosure Form is the documentation of the invention. This is a means to document particulars of your invention and submitting it to the patent attorney who is filing your patent application.
The Patents Act 1970, along with the Patents Rules 1972, came into force on 20th April 1972, replacing the Indian Patents and Designs Act 1911. The Patents Act was largely based on the recommendations of the Ayyangar Committee Report headed by Justice N. Rajagopala Ayyangar. One of the recommendations was the allowance of only process patents with regard to inventions relating to drugs, medicines, food and chemicals.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).