|
|
|
| The Construction of the Judicial Adjudication System for the Validity of Patents in China |
| LIU Jian-cui |
| School of Law, Intellectual Property Institute, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518060 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Patent validity refers to the valid legal rights status of the patent, and the patent can be protected by the law. The judicial problem faced by the validity of patents in China stems from the strict observance of administrative authority in the patent confirmation system. Due to the administrative behavior attributes of confirming patent rights, early theories believe that the effectiveness of patent validity should not be subject to judicial review in patent administrative lawsuits or patent civil infringement disputes. However, with the surge in the number of patent litigation cases, the procedure for confirmation of patent rights has led to the suspension of cases and lengthened the litigation cycle, and some disputes have been unresolved for a long time, and the courts and parties have been overwhelmed. In China, from the strict administrative review of patent confirmation to the practical exploration in patent judicial adjudication, this shift can respond quickly to the practical needs of patent rights protection and promote the transformation of scientific and technological achievements into real productivity. The United States and Japan have their own characteristics in exploring the “dual-track system” of administrative examination and judicial examination of patents, all of them can provide reference experience for the construction of China's judicial adjudication system for patent validity. Under the framework of the principles of the final judicial situation, the principles of rights relief, and the principles of procedural economic principles. It is necessary for China to determine the reasonable scope of judicial review with patent validity, unified adjudication standards for administration and justice and clarify the boundaries of the effectiveness of the referee. On this basis, a judicial adjudication system for patent validity with Chinese characteristics should be constructed, to overcome the limitations of a single administrative confirmation system.
|
|
Received: 10 January 2024
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 陈宗波,李晓秋,姚兵兵等.专利法体系化判解研究[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2008.426.
[2] 易玲. 日本专利无效判定制度之改革及其启示[J].法商研究,2017,(2):173-181.
[3] 王晨,李亚兰.和谐社会构建中的行政诉讼基本原则[J].学术交流,2009,(7):37-40.
[4] 孔祥俊. WTO对司法审查的要求及我国司法审查面临的任务和挑战[J].法律适用(国家法官学院学报),2001,(10):17-20.
[5] 杨寅. 普通法传统中的自然正义原则[J].华东政法学院学报,2000,(3):8-14.
[6] 江国华. 中国司法学[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2016.25.
[7] (美)罗伯特.P.莫杰思.知识产权正当性解释[M].金海军,史兆欢,寇海侠译.北京:商务印书馆,2019.297.
[8] 李明德. 关于我国知识产权法院体系建设的几个问题[J].知识产权,2018,(3):14-26.
[9] 梁熙艳.权利之限:侵权审理法院能否直接裁决专利权的有效性——析日本最高裁判所的“Kilby第275号专利上告审判决”及影响[J].知识产权,2005,(4):58-63.
[10] 徐棣枫,张迩瀚.论我国专利确权制度的改革路径:从“行政一元制”到“行政与司法二元制”[J].重庆大学学报(社会科学版),2022,(2):183-194.
[11] 管荣齐. 法院审查专利有效性的制度要素[J].学术论坛,2022,(2):28-41.
[12] 王云霞. 行政诉讼司法建议的功能扩张及省思[J].中国法学,2022,(4):196-212. |
|
|
|
2024, Vol. 41 
