|
|
|
No. 6 of the Top 10 Intellectual Property Cases Tried by Chinese Courts in 2020 Issued by the Supreme People's Court: Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd. and Shenzhen Branch of Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd. v. Sharp Corporation and ScienBiziP Japan Co., Ltd. — Oppo anti-suit injunction case (case of dispute over licensing of standard-essential patents)
|
|
最高人民法院发布2020年中国法院10大知识产权案件之六：OPPO广东移动通信有限公司、OPPO广东移动通信有限公司深圳分公司与夏普株式会社、赛恩倍吉日本株式会社标准必要专利许可纠纷案——OPPO“禁诉令”案
|
|
【法宝引证码】
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| No. 6 of the Top 10 Intellectual Property Cases Tried by Chinese Courts in 2020 Issued by the Supreme People's Court: Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd. and Shenzhen Branch of Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd. v. Sharp Corporation and ScienBiziP Japan Co., Ltd. (case of dispute over licensing of standard-essential patents) | | 最高人民法院发布2020年中国法院10大知识产权案件之六：OPPO广东移动通信有限公司、OPPO广东移动通信有限公司深圳分公司与夏普株式会社、赛恩倍吉日本株式会社标准必要专利许可纠纷案 |
| —Oppo anti-suit injunction case | | ——OPPO“禁诉令”案 |
| (Civil Ruling No. 689A [2020], First, Civil, 03, Guangdong of the Shenzhen City Intermediate People's Court of Guangdong Province) | | 广东省深圳市中级人民法院（2020）粤03民初689号之一民事裁定书 |
| [Case Summary] Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd. and Shenzhen Branch of Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd. (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Oppo Companies") negotiated about the licensing of a standard-essential patent at the request of Sharp Corporation. In the process of negotiation, Sharp Corporation filed a patent infringement action against Oppo Companies overseas. Oppo Companies stated that Sharp Corporation was in violation of the FRAND obligation by unilaterally filing a lawsuit for an injunction with respect to the patent within the scope of negotiation, and thus sued in the Shenzhen City Intermediate People's Court of Guangdong Province, claiming a court adjudication on the relevant global rate at which the relevant standard-essential patent owned by Sharp Corporation was licensed to Oppo Companies. In the meantime, in view of the possibility that Sharp Corporation might coerce it into negotiation by the "extraterritorial injunction," Oppo Companies filed an injunction application. The court of first instance ruled that Sharp Corporation should not file a new lawsuit or judicial injunction against Oppo Companies in any other country or region regarding the case-related patent, on pain of a daily fine of 1 million, until a final judgment on this case was made. Seven hours after the first instance court issued the anti-suit injunction, the District Court I of Munich, Germany issued an anti-anti-suit injunction against Oppo Companies, requiring Oppo Companies to apply to the Chinese court for withdrawal of the anti-suit injunction. The court of first instance conducted a court investigation with respect to the anti-suit injunction and the anti-anti-suit injunction, perpetuated the facts and evidence that Sharp Corporation violated the injunctive ruling, and enlightened it as to the serious legal consequences of violating the adjudication of the Chinese court. Finally, Sharp Corporation unconditionally withdrew the reconsideration application in this case and the anti-anti-suit injunction it applied for to the German court, and stated that it would fully respect and strictly comply with the effective adjudication of the Chinese court. | | 【案情摘要】OPPO广东移动通信有限公司、OPPO广东移动通信有限公司深圳分公司（以下统称OPPO公司）应夏普株式会社要求进行标准必要专利许可谈判。谈判过程中，夏普株式会社在域外针对OPPO公司提起专利侵权诉讼。OPPO公司认为，夏普株式会社单方面就谈判范围内的专利提起诉讼并要求禁令的行为违反了FRAND义务，遂向广东省深圳市中级人民法院提起诉讼，请求法院就夏普株式会社拥有的相关标准必要专利对OPPO公司进行许可的全球费率作出裁判。同时，鉴于夏普株式会社可能以“域外禁令”胁迫其进行谈判，OPPO公司提出行为保全申请。一审法院裁定，夏普株式会社在本案终审判决作出之前，不得向其他国家、地区就本案所涉专利对OPPO公司提出新的诉讼或司法禁令，如有违反处每日罚款人民币100 万元。在一审法院发出“禁诉令”后7小时，德国慕尼黑第一地区法院向OPPO公司下达了“反禁诉令”，要求OPPO公司向中国法院申请撤回禁诉令。一审法院围绕“禁诉令”和“反禁诉令”，进行了法庭调查，固定了夏普株式会社违反行为保全裁定的事实和证据，并向其释明违反中国法院裁判的严重法律后果。最终，夏普株式会社无条件撤回了本案中的复议申请和向德国法院申请的“反禁诉令”，同时表示将充分尊重和严格遵守中国法院的生效裁决。 |
| ．．．．．． | | ．．．．．． |
Dear visitor,you are attempting to view a subscription-based section of lawinfochina.com. If you are already a subscriber, please login to enjoy access to our databases . If you are not a subscriber, please subscribe . Should you have any questions, please contact us at:
+86 (10) 8268-9699 or +86 (10) 8266-8266 (ext. 153)
Mobile: +86 133-1157-0713
Fax: +86 (10) 8266-8268
database@chinalawinfo.com
| |
您好：您现在要进入的是北大法律英文网会员专区，如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录，进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息；如您还不是我们 的英文用户，请注册并交纳相应费用成为我们的英文会员 。如有问题请来电咨询；
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail: database@chinalawinfo.com
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content
found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright
owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.
Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations
of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language
versions as the final authority. lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly
or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.
We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve
the quality of our materials.
|
|
| |
|
|