The Supreme Court: Anti-Monopoly Jurisdiction in Civil Cases to be Entertained by IP Divisions
August 2, 2008As The Anti-monopoly Law went into effect on August 1, 2008, the Supreme Court issued a directive commanding courts of various levels to execute their judicial duties and try the cases to faithfully implement the Anti-monopoly Law. The IP Divisions of various courts, which are responsible for IP cases, should carefully consider anti-monopoly civil cases involving IP misuse and other anti-monopoly issues.
The Directive stated that all civil complaints’ against monopolistic conducts that satisfy the procedural requirement under Article 108 of the Civil Procedure and the Anti-monopoly Law against monopolistic conducts must be entertained and tried. The Anti-monopoly Law has close intersection with the protection of intellectual property rights, and falls in the same range of the law of competition as the Unfair Competition Law. From April 1, 2008, the Supreme Court categorized both monopoly and unfair competition disputes as part of the IP dispute category of cases. According to this organization, the IP Division in all levels of the People’s Courts should be responsible for anti-monopoly civil litigation involving IP misuse, as well as other monopoly allegations.
The Directive also stressed that any petition for administrative litigation over specific actions of anti-monopoly enforcement agencies brought by individuals, corporations or other entities under the Anti-monopoly Law should be examined under the Administrative Procedure and Article 53 of the Anti-monopoly Law to see whether administrative reconsideration is available. Where a petition meets the requirement for judicial review, and other procedural requirement for administrative litigation, courts should take the cases.
The Directive stated that all civil complaints’ against monopolistic conducts that satisfy the procedural requirement under Article 108 of the Civil Procedure and the Anti-monopoly Law against monopolistic conducts must be entertained and tried. The Anti-monopoly Law has close intersection with the protection of intellectual property rights, and falls in the same range of the law of competition as the Unfair Competition Law. From April 1, 2008, the Supreme Court categorized both monopoly and unfair competition disputes as part of the IP dispute category of cases. According to this organization, the IP Division in all levels of the People’s Courts should be responsible for anti-monopoly civil litigation involving IP misuse, as well as other monopoly allegations.
The Directive also stressed that any petition for administrative litigation over specific actions of anti-monopoly enforcement agencies brought by individuals, corporations or other entities under the Anti-monopoly Law should be examined under the Administrative Procedure and Article 53 of the Anti-monopoly Law to see whether administrative reconsideration is available. Where a petition meets the requirement for judicial review, and other procedural requirement for administrative litigation, courts should take the cases.
Keywords
Headquarters
Add(Beijing):7th Floor,Scitech Place,22 Jianguomenwai Avenue,Beijing 100004,China
Tel: ＋86 10 5920 8888
Fax: ＋86 10 5920 8588
E-mail: mail@unitalen.com
Newsletter
Do not miss out on the latest announcements we've provided
Networking
Unitalen Mail Box ?2016 Unitalen Attorneys at Law 版權(quán)所有 集佳知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)代理有限公司 京ICP備11033076號(hào) 京公網(wǎng)安備11010502020670