Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

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

Injunctions under review in China

IP owners who think their products are being infringed often want just one thing: for the infringement to stop (not patent trolls, of course, but that’s another story). In China, however, stopping infringement can be trickier than usual


Attendees at this week's Managing IP Innovation Forum in Shanghai

That’s not because enforcement is routinely terrible. Most IP practitioners we have heard from this week say things aren’t bad and they are getting better. People have been subjected to mass IP education campaigns, officials are better trained and higher levels of domestic innovation mean that China is increasingly incentivised to crack down on IP infractions.

But IP owners do want Chinese courts to offer more preliminary injunctions. Tough evidence rules and difficulties in obtaining preservation orders make it hard for plaintiffs to prove how much defendants profit from infringing IP. As a result, many can only seek statutory damages, which are still low. When damages orders have little deterrent effect, preliminary injunctions take on particular significance.

So far, however, Chinese judges have been reluctant to grant them. In 2011, for example, there were around 130 out of almost 60,000 civil IP cases (the vast majority of which were between Chinese companies).

That is the result of guidance from the top. At the end of 2011 the Supreme People’s Court issued a judicial interpretation setting out how lower courts should handle IP cases, which emphasised that judges should be cautious about granting preliminary injunctions. That followed a 2009 judicial interpretation, which set out when courts should consider not granting injunctive relief.

Now it seems as though the top court is rethinking its position. We understand that members of its IP Tribunal have been meeting IP professionals from other jurisdictions to hear more about injunction practices in their countries – with a view to issuing a new judicial interpretation next year.

Of course courts overseas don’t hand out injunctions to anyone who wants one. Nor should they. But if Chinese judges were encouraged to grant more, it might do much to reconcile IP owners to low damages awards.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Counsel are eying domestic industry, concurrent PTAB proceedings and heightened scrutiny of cases before institution
Jack Daniel’s has a good chance of winning its dispute over dog toys, but SCOTUS will still want to protect free speech, predict sources
AI users and lawyers discuss why the rulebook for registering AI-generated content may create problems and needs further work
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
A technical effect must still be evident in the original patent filing, the EBoA said in its G2/21 decision today, March 23
Brands should not be deterred from pursuing lookalike producers, and an unfair advantage claim could be the key, say Emma Teichmann and Geoff Steward at Stobbs
Justice Mellor’s highly anticipated ruling surprised SEP owners and reassured implementers that the UK may not be so hostile after all
The England and Wales High Court's judgment comes ahead of a separate hearing concerning one of the patents-in-suit at the EPO
While the rules allow foreign firms to open local offices and offer IP services, a ban on litigation and practising Indian law could mean little will change
A New York federal court heard oral arguments this week in a copyright case pitting publishing giants against a digital library