Finally a unified “Court of Appeal” for technology IP in China
On October 26, 2018, China’s Supreme People’s Court (“SPC”) received approval to establish a specialized intellectual property court within the SPC to handle appeal cases involving technology-related IP for both civil (e.g., patent infringement) and administrative (e.g., patent invalidity) judgments. Technology-related IP includes invention patents, utility models, new plant species, IC design, trade secret, software, and anti-trust cases. [1]
On December 28, 2018, the SPC announced the opening of this new SPC IP Court on January 1, 2019, and laid out some details surrounding how things would work [2]. We have summarized some of the details below.
The SPC IP Court is based in Beijing and its judgments, rulings, mediations, and decisions are the judgments, rulings, mediations, and decisions of the Supreme People’s Court (the highest court in China).
The SPC IP Court hears the following cases:
All appeals arising from technology-related IP “first instance[3]” judgments in civil or administrative cases arising out of the intermediate courts, high courts, IP courts
Major and complicated first instance cases
Other cases the SPC determines should be tried by the SPC IP Court
Major, difficult, or complicated cases shall be discussed by a panel consisting of the President, Vice President, and a number of senior judges
The SPC IP Court will use several electronic litigation platforms or online video to facilitate several aspects of litigations, including the serving or transfer of litigation documents, evidence, conducting pre-trial meetings, evidence exchanges, and more.
Prior basic people’s courts who had been given authority to accept first-instance technology-related IP cases will no longer accept those cases. All technology-related IP cases will be first filed at the intermediate court level.
Additional provisions describe the rules and appeals process for ongoing cases. In summary, first instance judgments decided after January 1, 2019 can appeal directly to the new SPC IP Court.
Benefits
The creation of this SPC level court and the access it provides is monumental news for IP owners around the world. The landscape has fundamentally changed from before, when access to the SPC was done on a discretionary basis. Complicated IP cases can be resolved more efficiently, more cost-effectively, and with greater consistency and quality. Most importantly, all technology-related IP cases have the legal right to be heard by this SPC IP Court as a second-instance decision[4].
Greater Consistency
The creation of this court is likely to provide harmonized IP decisions at the appeals level by creating a “unified” appeals court for technology-related IP, addressing previous inconsistencies that arose between different provincial High Courts. Additionally, this new SPC IP Court will be the final court of appeal for both invalidation and infringement proceedings[5], similar to the current function of the Supreme People’s Court (SPC).
Under the previous system, parties not pleased with the results of a first judgment (first instance), could appeal to a higher court (intermediate courts or high courts) within the jurisdiction for a second instance (final) decision. Unfortunately, the higher courts have varied in their judgments over the years, leading to inconsistencies across the country on various IP issues.[6] In fact, many have been asking for years for the creation of a single IP court to handle appeals decisions, so this is a welcomed change for so many reasons.
Higher Quality Decisions
Some of the country’s most respected and experienced IP judges have been tapped to lead this court, which should hopefully lead to higher quality and more consistent IP decisions for the country.
Furthermore, all technology-related IP matters now must be initially filed at the intermediate court level[7], a change from the past when certain basic people’s courts had been given authority to handle first instance technology-related IP cases. This should further increase quality and consistency of IP rulings in China.
These latest changes, together with the ever-evolving growth of China’s larger IP court system (see below), will continue to improve the quality of IP court decisions coming out of China.
Major Developments in China’s IP Landscape
The change described above is only one of several major changes in IP that have been sweeping through the Chinese court systems in the past 5 years. In 2014 China created specialized IP intermediate-level courts in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou to handle technology-related IP disputes.
Between 2017 and 2018, China created over a dozen specialized IP Tribunals in multiple different jurisdictions all across China. These IP Tribunals are associated with the intermediate courts in their respective locations, though some have jurisdictions that reach a larger territorial scope (such as the entire province) depending on the locations of the other IP Tribunals. China continues to create more of these IP Tribunals throughout China, hopefully one day providing everyone with a “local” intermediate court in which to file technology-related IP lawsuits.
This creation of an SPC level unified appellate court is an important component that fits very well into China’s larger goal of creating a specialized IP court system that can efficiently, consistently, and effectively rule on the many complex technology-related IP disputes in the country.
It will be very interesting to see how the new SPC IP Court handles its first several cases. The world is watching, and if the judgments really seem more consistent, fair, and beneficial to patentees, more and more innovation companies, both domestically and worldwide, will see China as a strong, efficient, and beneficial place in which to conduct patent litigation.
Jennifer Che, J.D. is a US Patent Attorney and Vice President and Partner at Eagle IP, a Boutique Patent Firm with offices in Hong Kong, Shenzhen, and Macau.[email protected]
-------------------------------------------------
[3] China operates under a two instance system, which means a party is typically only entitled to two trials (essentially, one appeal) on a matter. The second instance is the final decision. Additional appeals are subject to the court’s discretion.[4] China operates under a two instance system, which means a party is typically only entitled to two trials (essentially, one appeal) on a matter. The second instance is the final decision. Additional appeals are subject to the court’s discretion.[5] China has a bifurcated legal system where patent infringement and patent invalidation cases are heard by separate entities. Patent infringement cases are first heard by the people’s court (first instance) which can then be appealed to a second instance case either at the SPC IP Court (new system) or the High Court within the jurisdiction (old system). Patent invalidation decisions are first heard by the Patent Re-examination Board of the CNIPA (China National Intellectual Property Administration or the Chinese Patent Office) before they are appealed to a first instance case at the Beijing IP Court, which can be further appealed to a second instance case either to the SPC IP Court (new system) or the Beijing High Court (old system).[6] Unlike the US, a common law legal system where judges are bound by precedential case law, China is a civil law country, where previous decisions by a higher court cannot be used as binding legal interpretation for lower courts. This leads to a potential for large inconsistencies between courts.[7] Non-technology-related IP cases, such as design, trademark, and copyright cases, will still go through traditional court channels.
其他文章
Do Invention and UM Patents Filed on the Same Day Rise and Fall Together?
2021年8月19日
Snippets of Court Cases, Provisions, and Key Observations about China’s IP Landscape Seminal Cases by the SPC Recently, the Intellectual Property Division of the Supreme People's Court (SPC) issued a list of seminal (精品) cases. Although China is not a case law country, such seminal cases issued by the SPC have high guiding impact for […]
閱讀更多 >
What Microsoft’s Recent Patent Invalidation Case in China Teaches Us About User Interface Patents
2026年1月29日
Each year the CNIPA publishes its Top Ten Patent Re-examination and Invalidation Cases for the previous year. These cases are meant to be guiding cases, showcasing exemplary real-world decisions that clarify certain aspects of the law. Today we’ll be sharing about one of the Top 10 Invalidation Cases in 2024 involving Microsoft (China) Co., Ltd. […]
閱讀更多 >
China’s Newest Examination Guidelines: Inventive Step for Biological / Life Science Inventions (Part III)
2021年4月30日
This is Part III of a three-part series summarizing the Examination Guidelines that were released by the CNIPA on January 15, 2021, one year to the date of Phase 1 of the US and China Economic and Trade Agreement. That agreement included specific provisions where China "shall permit pharmaceutical patent applicants to rely on supplemental […]
閱讀更多 >
Do Promotional Marketing Materials Constitute an “Offer for Sale” under Chinese Patent Law? Bayer IP GmbH v. Nanjing Hang Seng Pharmaceutical
2023年12月12日
Bayer's blockbuster drug Rivaroxaban has seen its share of patent litigations in China, several of which are big enough to be listed as Top 10 IP cases or 50 Representative IP cases. We summarized an invalidation case back in 2020 where all of Bayer’s claims directed towards the compound were upheld. Recently, another Rivaroxaban case […]
閱讀更多 >
我們過去活動
Pauli Wong, joined HKSTP Global Connect Market Discovery: Your Cross-Border Playbook as a panel speaker
2026年11月4日
Jennifer Che and Pauli Wong Co-Teach Advanced Patent Skills Seminar at HKU-TEC
2026年10月15日
Pauli Wong gave a talk at Hong Kong Life Sciences Society (HKLSS)
2026年10月10日
BioHK2026 | Biotech IP in practice
2026年9月16日
Jennifer Che Once Again Named to the IAM Strategy 300
2026年8月21日
Yolanda Wang attended the 1st China Pharmaceutical Innovation Conference
