Chinese companies may not have home-court advantage

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Chinese companies may not have home-court advantage

A new report suggests that foreign plaintiffs in IP cases are winning at higher rates in Chinese courts than Chinese rights holders, notwithstanding long-standing concerns about bias in favour of domestic enterprises

According to a study from Thomson Reuters, in cases since 2006 involving foreign plaintiffs and Chinese defendants, the plaintiff won approximately 75% of the time. Meanwhile, Chinese plaintiffs facing Chinese defendants only prevailed 63% of the time.

Foreign plaintiffs also generally received higher statutory compensation- the mean award was slightly over Rmb 200,000 ($32,300) in cases with foreign rights holders, as opposed to about Rmb 120,000 for Chinese patent holders.

Though this data does not conclusively refute concerns of domestic bias in Chinese courts (for example, the difference in quality in patents held by international versus domestic companies may help to explain the higher rates of success), it does demonstrate the complexity of the issue.

Other interesting tidbits from the report:

· While more Chinese patent applications are directed at data processing systems than any other category, inventors are also filing many patents in categories such as digital information transmission, pharmaceuticals, alkaloids/plant extracts and polymer applications. In fact, filings from Chinese inventors hold nearly 80% of global applications for inventions involving alkaloids and plant extracts, about 60% of applications for general pharmaceutical activities and more than half of all patents involving polymerisation and polymer chemical modification.

· The report noted that in 2008, each Chinese patent in the data processing category received on average 1.17 forward citations. Though this is notably lower than US patents in this field (6.72 forward citations per patent), it is comparable to Japanese patents (1.82 forward cites), Europe (1.31 forward cites) and South Korea (0.76 forward cites). Data processing is the most active field for Chinese patent filers, and forward citations is one metric that some use to evaluate patent quality.

· Patent applications in China increased by 16.3 percent between from 2012 to 2013, with similarly large increases each year since 2009. However, filings by foreign applicants stayed relatively flat during this period, and thus making up a smaller portion of total patent filings in China.

The full report, "China’s Innovation Quotient – Trends in Patenting and the Globalisation of Chinese Innovation", can be found here.



 

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

In other news, Ericsson sought a declaratory judgment against Acer and Netflix filed a cease-and-desist letter against ByteDance over AI misuse
As trade secret filings rise due to AI development and economic espionage concerns, firms are relying on proactive counselling to help clients navigate disputes
IP firm leaders share why they remain positive in the face of falling patent applications from US filers, and how they are meeting a rising demand from China
The power of DEI to swing IP pitches is welcome, but why does it have to be left so late?
Mathew Lucas has joined Pearce IP after spending more than 25 years at Qantm IP-owned firm Davies Collison Cave
Exclusive survey data reveals a generally lax in-house attitude towards DEI, but pitches have been known to turn on a final diversity question
Managing IP will host a ceremony in London on May 1 to reveal the winners
Abigail Wise shares her unusual pathway into the profession, from failing A-levels to becoming Lewis Silkin’s first female IP partner
There are some impressive AI tools available for trademark lawyers, but law firm leaders say humans can still outthink the bots
Lawyers at Simmons & Simmons look ahead to a UK Supreme Court hearing in which the court will consider whether English courts can determine FRAND terms when the licence is offered by an intermediary rather than an SEP owner
Gift this article