Vivien Chan & Co. is a full-service law practice with offices in Hong Kong SAR (1985) and Beijing (1993). The firm is consistently recognised as a premier law firm for and in Greater China, and has over 30 years of knowledge of the legal culture and market dynamics.
The firm's lawyers produce regular publications for clients. These provide updates on significant changes and developments on the area of intellectual property law in China and the wider Asia-Pacific region.
China's top 10 trademark developments |
|
|---|---|
|
Anna Mae Koo, Ann Xu Vivien Chan & Co's experts review and list the top 10 developments from China in 2020. The highlights include the bad faith provision against trademark squatters and agents, the suspension of refusal review pending the disposition of prior marks, the stricter examination of specifications for international registrations, and increased penalties against trademark infringers. |
Beyond registration: Case sharing on how to defend and maintain your trademark in China |
|
|---|---|
|
Vivien Chan, Ken Hung Apart from gaining unfair advantage via prior bad faith trademark filings/registrations in mainland China, squatters are trying to attack brand owners' prior registrations, followed up by their own filings to try to gain unfair advantage against brand owners. Securing your own trademark registrations will be an important first step, while brand owners shall also get themselves ready in maintaining and defending their own trademark registrations. |
New guidance document on trademark infringement in China |
|
|---|---|
|
Vivien Chan, Anna Mae Koo In June 2020, China's National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) issued the highly anticipated Criteria for Determining Trademark Infringement (the Criteria). The Criteria offers unified standards and guidance to frontline enforcers in determining claims for trademark infringement in China. The Criteria also provides answers to owners of Chinese trademarks for some common issues in enforcement. |
Suspension of trademark examination pending proceedings against cited marks |
|
|---|---|
|
Anna Mae Koo, Ann Xu When a trademark application is blocked due to the existence of prior similar mark(s), one of the ways to overcome the same would be to try removing the prior mark(s), such as commencing opposition/invalidation/cancellation proceedings. However, under the examination practice in China, there is no formal suspension procedure, meaning that the trademark application will continue to be examined notwithstanding that the actions against the prior mark(s) are still pending. |
How an asymmetric jurisdiction clause may affect enforcement in mainland China: A new take by the Hong Kong SAR court |
|
|---|---|
|
Vivien Chan, Ken Hung An asymmetric jurisdiction clause (AJC) is a jurisdiction clause that allows one party to commence proceedings over disputes arising from the underlying contract against the other contracting party in any jurisdiction of its choice while the other party is restricted to commence proceedings exclusively in one specified jurisdiction. AJCs are most commonly used in facility or loan agreements, especially if the agreement involves cross-border financial arrangements or overseas parties. |
![1200_17th_images_071812[1] 3.jpg](https://static.legalbenchmarkinggroup.com/dims4/default/403fef9/2147483647/strip/true/crop/3328x1874+0+172/resize/293x165!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fk4-prod-legal.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2Fae%2Fda%2F3bb43c034f46989edd34a5c00e5f%2F1200-17th-images-0718121-3.jpg)
