Announcement of the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China

The “Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on the Relevant Issues concerning the Scope of Jurisdiction and the Scope of Application of Laws for Hearing Trademark Cases”, which was adopted at the 1203rd meeting of the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People’s Court on December 25, 2001, is hereby promulgated, and shall come into force on January 21, 2002.

January 9, 2002


The “Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress on Amending the Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China” (hereinafter referred to as the Decision on Amending the Trademark Law) was adopted at the 24th session of the Standing Committee of the 9th National People’s Congress, and shall come into force on December 1, 2001. In order to correctly hear trademark cases, we hereby give the following interpretation in accordance with the “Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China” (hereinafter referred to as the Trademark Law), the “Civil Litigation Law of the People’s Republic of China” and the “Administrative Litigation Law of the People’s Republic of China” (hereinafter referred to as the Administrative Litigation Law) regarding the relevant issues concerning the scope of jurisdiction and the scope application of laws for the people’s courts in their hearing of trademark cases:

Article 1 The people’s courts may accept the following trademark cases:
1. cases on dissatisfaction with the review decision or ruling made by the Trademark Review and Hearing Board of the administrative department for industry and commerce of the State Council (hereinafter referred to as the Trademark Review and Hearing Board);
2. cases on dissatisfaction with the specific administrative acts made by the administrative department for industry and commerce;
3. cases on disputes over the ownership of the right to the exclusive use of a trademark;
4. cases on disputes over infringement upon the right to the exclusive use of a trademark;
5. cases on disputes over contracts on assignment of the right to the exclusive use of a trademark;
6. cases on disputes over contracts on the license for use of a trademark;
7. cases on applying for suspension of infringement upon the right to the exclusive use of a trademark before a lawsuit is filed;
8. cases on applying for preservation of properties before a lawsuit is filed;
9. cases on applying for preservation of evidence before a lawsuit is filed;
10. other trademark cases.

Article 2 With respect to the cases of the first instance as listed in Item (1) of Article 1 of this Interpretation, the higher people’s court of Beijing Municipality shall, upon authorization of the Supreme People’s Court, determine the jurisdiction of the relevant intermediate people’s courts within its own jurisdiction.

With respect to the cases of the first instance as listed in Item (2) of Article 1 of this Interpretation, the jurisdiction shall be determined in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Administrative Litigation Law.

The cases of the first instance on civil disputes over trademark shall be under jurisdiction of the people’s court at the intermediate level or above.

Each higher people’s court may, in light of the actual circumstance of its own jurisdiction, and upon approval of the Supreme People’s Court, determine 1 or 2 grass-roots people’s courts in a relatively large city to accept the cases of the first instance on civil disputes over trademark.

Article 3 Where a trademark registrant or interested person requests the administrative department for industry and commerce for settlement of the infringement upon the right to the exclusive use of a trademark, and meanwhile files a lawsuit by to the people’s court, claiming compensation for its/his damage due to infringement upon the right to the exclusive use of a trademark, the people’s court shall accept the lawsuit.

Article 4 With respect to the cases accepted by the Trademark Review and Hearing Board before the Decision on Amending the Trademark Law comes into force, if any party concerned is dissatisfied with a review decision or ruling made after the Decision comes into force, and files a lawsuit to the people’s court, the people’s court shall accept the lawsuit.

Article 5 Unless it is otherwise differently prescribed in this Interpretation, the administrative cases in which the party concerned is dissatisfied with the review decision or ruling made by the Trademark Review and Hearing Board after the Decision on Amending the Trademark Law comes into force regarding the circumstances listed in Article 4, Article 5, Article 8, Paragraph 1 of Article 9, Items (2) through (4) of Paragraph 1 of Article 10, Paragraph 2 of Article 10, Article 11, Article 12, Article 13, Article 15, Article 16, Article 24, Article 25, Article 31 of the Amended Trademark Law, which arose before the Decision on Amending the Trademark Law comes into force, and in which the party concerned files a lawsuit to the people’s court, shall be examined in accordance with the corresponding provisions of the amended Trademark Law. In case any of the other circumstances arises, the cases shall be examined in accordance with the corresponding provisions of the former Trademark Law.

Article 6 Where a party concerned is dissatisfied with the ruling made by the Trademark Review and Hearing Board regarding the dispute over a registered trademark, which arose when the Decision on Amending the Trademark Law has been effective for one year, and therefore files a lawsuit to the people’s court, the case shall be governed by the time limit for filing an application as prescribed in Paragraphs 2 of Article 27 of the former Trademark Law. If, when the Decision on Amending the Trademark Law comes into force, the trademark has been registered for less than one year, the case shall be governed by the time limit for filing an application as prescribed in Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 41 of the amended Trademark Law.

Article 7 Where, with respect to the infringement upon the right to the exclusive use of a trademark, which occurred before the Decision on Amending the Trademark Law comes into force, the trademark registrant or interested person files an application to the people’s court after the said Decision comes into force but before it files a lawsuit for taking the measure of ordering the infringer to suspend the infringement or of preserving the evidence, the provisions in Articles 57 and 58 of the amended Trademark Law shall apply.

Article 8 Where, with respect to a case for which a lawsuit is filed due to the infringement upon the right to the exclusive use of a trademark, which occurred before the Decision on Amending the Trademark Law comes into force, the people’s court has not made an effective judgment when the said Decision comes into force, the case shall be handled with reference to the provisions in Article 56 of the amended Trademark Law.

Article 9 Unless it is otherwise differently prescribed in this Interpretation, if any case of civil dispute over trademark, which is accepted by the people’s court after the Decision on Amending the Trademark Law comes into force, involves any civil conduct which occurred before the said Decision comes into force, the provisions of the former Trademark Law shall apply; while if the case involves any civil conduct which occurred after the said Decision comes into force, the provisions of the amended Trademark Law shall apply; further, if the case involves any civil conduct which occurred before the said Decision comes into force but continues until the time after the said Decision comes into force, the provisions of the former Trademark Law and of the Amended Trademark Law shall apply separately.

Article 10 Where a case accepted by the people’s court on the dispute over infringement upon the right to the exclusive use of a trademark has been resolved by the administrative department for industry and commerce, the people’s court shall still examine the facts on the civil dispute between the parties concerned.