ARTICLE
23 April 2021

China IP Highlights: March 2021 (Issue 3)

R
Rouse

Contributor

Rouse is an IP services business focused on emerging markets. We operate as a closely integrated network to provide the full range of intellectual property services, from patent and trade mark protection and management to commercialisation, global enforcement and anti-counterfeiting.
On March 3, 2021, the Supreme People's Court issued the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of Punitive Damages in Civil Cases of Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights".
China Intellectual Property
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

CASE SPOTLIGHT

Supreme People's Court Issued Typical Infringement of Intellectual Property Cases Applying Punitive Damages

最高法发布侵害知产民案适用惩罚性赔偿典型案例

Date: 2021-03-15

On March 3, 2021, the Supreme People's Court issued the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of Punitive Damages in Civil Cases of Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights". In order to accurately understand the application and ensure the correct implementation of the punitive damages system, the Supreme People's Court issued six "Typical Cases of Applying Punitive Damages in Civil Cases of Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights" These typical cases include the disputes between Guangzhou Tinci Materials Co., Ltd. and Anhui Newman Fine Chemicals Co., Ltd. on technical secret infringement, Erdos Group and Miqi Company on trademark infringement, Xiaomi Technology and Zhongshan Pentium on trademark infringement and unfair competition, Wuliangye Yibin Company Limited and Xu Zhonghua on trademark infringement, Adidas and Ruan Guoqiang on trademark infringement, and a trademark infringement dispute between Opple and Huasheng.

The case on technical secret infringement between Guangzhou Tinci Materials Co., Ltd. and Anhui Newman Fine Chemicals Co., Ltd. was the first punitive compensation case for intellectual property infringement judged by the Supreme People's Court. The judgment of the case fully considered the subjective malice of the accused infringer, the business of infringement, the hindrance of proof, the duration of the accused infringement, the scale of infringement and other factors, and determined the statutory multiple of punitive damages to the maximum at five times. Anhui Newman Fine Chemicals Co., Ltd. was ordered to compensate Guangzhou Tinci Materials Co., Ltd. and Jiujiang Tianci Company for economic losses of RMB 30 million and reasonable expenses of RMB 400,000. Defendants Hua, Liu, Hu and Zhu were jointly and severally liable to compensate RMB 5 million, RMB 30 million, RMB 1 million and RMB 1 million respectively.

Source: http://www.court.gov.cn/zixun-xiangqing-290651.html

Originally published 2021-03-15

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.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More