中国专利诉讼中的反诉禁令:司法自我约束的作用何在?

Alexandr Svetlicinii, Fali Xie
{"title":"中国专利诉讼中的反诉禁令:司法自我约束的作用何在?","authors":"Alexandr Svetlicinii, Fali Xie","doi":"10.1093/jiplp/jpae049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Starting from 2020, the Chinese courts have actively participated in the jurisdictional battles for the standard essential patent (SEP) disputes, a pivotal development marked by the Supreme People’s Court’s inaugural SEP-related anti-suit injunction (ASI) in Huawei v Conversant. Subsequently, lower courts in China have emulated this approach by issuing ASIs targeting SEPs in the domain of information and communication technology. The present study highlights the features of the Chinese ‘act preservation measures’ by comparing them with the typical ASIs originally developed in the common law jurisdictions. This comparison reveals significant divergence in the factors considered by Chinese courts issuing ASIs, particularly in the context of cross-border patent litigation. The study aims at elucidating potential defenses that the respondents in SEP litigation may employ to contest the issuance of ASIs in Chinese judicial proceedings, with particular attention accorded to the principles of comity and public interest. The article concludes that the invocation of international comity and public interest in SEP litigation will encounter a formalistic assessment by the Chinese judiciary due to potential conflicts with statutory provisions and the lack of a more context-specific analysis. As a result, in the absence of supra-national mechanisms that would address the problem of parallel litigation, there appears to be little room for judicial self-restraint.","PeriodicalId":508706,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice","volume":"5 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The anti-suit injunctions in patent litigation in China: what role for judicial self-restraint?\",\"authors\":\"Alexandr Svetlicinii, Fali Xie\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jiplp/jpae049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Starting from 2020, the Chinese courts have actively participated in the jurisdictional battles for the standard essential patent (SEP) disputes, a pivotal development marked by the Supreme People’s Court’s inaugural SEP-related anti-suit injunction (ASI) in Huawei v Conversant. Subsequently, lower courts in China have emulated this approach by issuing ASIs targeting SEPs in the domain of information and communication technology. The present study highlights the features of the Chinese ‘act preservation measures’ by comparing them with the typical ASIs originally developed in the common law jurisdictions. This comparison reveals significant divergence in the factors considered by Chinese courts issuing ASIs, particularly in the context of cross-border patent litigation. The study aims at elucidating potential defenses that the respondents in SEP litigation may employ to contest the issuance of ASIs in Chinese judicial proceedings, with particular attention accorded to the principles of comity and public interest. The article concludes that the invocation of international comity and public interest in SEP litigation will encounter a formalistic assessment by the Chinese judiciary due to potential conflicts with statutory provisions and the lack of a more context-specific analysis. As a result, in the absence of supra-national mechanisms that would address the problem of parallel litigation, there appears to be little room for judicial self-restraint.\",\"PeriodicalId\":508706,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice\",\"volume\":\"5 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpae049\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpae049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自 2020 年起,中国法院开始积极参与标准必要专利(SEP)纠纷的管辖权争夺战,最高人民法院在华为诉 Conversant 案中首次发布了与 SEP 相关的反诉禁令(ASI),标志着这一关键发展。随后,中国的下级法院也纷纷效仿这一做法,针对信息和通信技术领域的 SEP 发布反诉禁令。本研究通过将中国的 "行为保全措施 "与普通法司法管辖区最初制定的典型 ASI 进行比较,突出了这些措施的特点。这种比较揭示了中国法院在签发专利申请保全措施时所考虑的因素存在重大差异,尤其是在跨国专利诉讼中。本研究旨在阐明 SEP 诉讼中的被申请人可能采用的抗辩理由,以便在中国的司法程序中对 ASI 的签发提出异议,并特别关注礼让和公共利益原则。文章的结论是,由于与法律规定的潜在冲突以及缺乏更具体的背景分析,在 SEP 诉讼中援引国际礼让和公共利益将遭遇中国司法机构的形式主义评估。因此,在缺乏解决平行诉讼问题的超国家机制的情况下,司法自我约束的空间似乎很小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The anti-suit injunctions in patent litigation in China: what role for judicial self-restraint?
Starting from 2020, the Chinese courts have actively participated in the jurisdictional battles for the standard essential patent (SEP) disputes, a pivotal development marked by the Supreme People’s Court’s inaugural SEP-related anti-suit injunction (ASI) in Huawei v Conversant. Subsequently, lower courts in China have emulated this approach by issuing ASIs targeting SEPs in the domain of information and communication technology. The present study highlights the features of the Chinese ‘act preservation measures’ by comparing them with the typical ASIs originally developed in the common law jurisdictions. This comparison reveals significant divergence in the factors considered by Chinese courts issuing ASIs, particularly in the context of cross-border patent litigation. The study aims at elucidating potential defenses that the respondents in SEP litigation may employ to contest the issuance of ASIs in Chinese judicial proceedings, with particular attention accorded to the principles of comity and public interest. The article concludes that the invocation of international comity and public interest in SEP litigation will encounter a formalistic assessment by the Chinese judiciary due to potential conflicts with statutory provisions and the lack of a more context-specific analysis. As a result, in the absence of supra-national mechanisms that would address the problem of parallel litigation, there appears to be little room for judicial self-restraint.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信