eISSN: 2957-3602 editor@grpublishing.org
All Journals
Submit your article

Global Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences

Open Access Peer Review International
Open Access

The Dilemma of Anti-Suit Injunctions in Cross-Border SEP Disputes: Challenges and Pathways for China

DOI https://doi.org/10.55640/gjhss/Volume05Issue03-02
PDF
Gao Jianxun 1 , Qiang Yuxin 1 , Zhou Anping 1 ORCID iD ,
4 School of Law, Fuzhou University; Beijing Weiheng (Fuzhou) Law Firm, Fuzhou, Fujian 350108, China
4 School of Law, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou, Fujian 350108, China
4 School of Law, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou, Fujian 350108, China

Abstract

Under the background of global competition in international technical standards, anti-suit injunctions have become an instrument for different countries to compete for judicial jurisdiction in transnational disputes involving standard essential patents. In recent years, China has tried to improve its relevant systems and regulations about anti-suit injunctions. An examination of anti-suit injunction practices in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany reveals that China faces several challenges: an unclear legal basis, jurisdictional conflicts, the diminished constraining effect of the principle of international comity, and an imbalance between efficiency and fairness in adjudication. These issues are prone to triggering international jurisdictional disputes and restrict the extraterritorial effect of such injunctions. To address these issues, China should ground its approach in domestic judicial practice, clarify the applicable rules of anti-suit injunctions on the legal foundation of the behavior preservation system, strengthen the application of the principle of international comity and international judicial coordination, define the purpose of granting anti-suit injunctions with a focus on improving dispute resolution efficiency, and prudently delineate their territorial and temporal scope to avert international parallel litigation. By doing so, it is possible for China to further improve the anti-suit injunction regime in cross-border standard essential patent disputes, safeguard its judicial sovereignty and the legitimate rights and interests of parties concerned, and adapt to the evolving landscape of international competition in technical standards.

Keywords

standard essential patents, anti-suit injunctions, international parallel litigation, conflict of jurisdiction, foreign-related litigation

References

📄 Ning, L. Z., & Gong, T. (2022). Adjudication of Global FRAND Royalty Rates for Standard Essential Patents: Practices, Controversies, and Countermeasures. Northern University Law Journal, 16(03), 38-52.
📄 Mao, H., & Bai, Y. (2024). Technology Standard Competition, Future Industrial Development, and National Strategic Game. Studies in Science of Science, 42(4).
📄 Ma, Z. F. (2023). The Legal Issues Behind Standards: With a Discussion on Correctly Understanding Standard Essential Patents. Journal of Guizhou Normal University (Social Science Edition), (02).
📄 Guan, C. Y. (2021). Exploration and Construction of the Anti-suit Injunction System in Standard Essential Patents Disputes. China Invention & Patent, (11).
📄 Zhang, H. Y. (2023). The Anti-Anti-Suit Injunction in German Standard Essential Patents Litigation and Its Implications. Intellectual Property, (06).
📄 Zhang, W. P. (2022). The Construction and Implementation of Anti-suit Injunctions in China. China Law Review, (2).
📄 Cui, G. B. (2023). The Application of Anti-suit Injunctions in Standard Essential Patents Litigation. Intellectual Property, (02), 41.
📄 Zhao, W. (2021). On the Anti-Suit Injunction in the Context of International Jurisdictional Conflicts: A Case Study of Standard Essential Patents Litigation. Theoretical Exploration, (4).
📄 Yang, Y. N. (2023). Legal Interpretation and Legal Construction of Anti-suit Injunctions for Standard Essential Patents. Electronics Intellectual Property, (5).
📄 Relevant scholars have put forward different views on whether China should apply the anti-suit injunction system to resolve SEP disputes. For example, Xu, W. G., & Jia, H. (2022). The Construction of China's Anti-suit Injunction System from the Perspective of Standard Essential Patents Disputes. Social Scientist, (10), 130-138, Li, S. Y., & Xie, S. S. (2016). Introduction to International Civil Procedure Law. Wuhan: Wuhan University Press, p. 339, Zhang, H. Y. (2023). The Anti-Anti-Suit Injunction in German Standard Essential Patent Litigation and Its Implications. Intellectual Property, (06), etc.
📄 Regarding the application of anti-suit injunctions, academic disputes mainly focus on whether to establish an independent anti-suit injunctions system. For example, Jiang, H. S. (2021). Issues and Responses in the Adjudication of Standard Essential Patents Cases. People's Court Daily, 07, Ou, F. Y., & Yuan, J. P. (2022). The Anti- suit Injunction System in International Patent Litigation. Journal of Hunan University (Social Sciences Edition), 36(02), 136-146, Li, Z. H. (2022). A Study on the Applicable Standards for Anti-suit Injunctions in Transnational Litigation Involving Standard Essential Patents. Studies in Law and Business, 39(04), etc.
📄 Scholars have put forward relevant suggestions regarding the conflict between anti-suit injunctions and anti- anti-suit injunctions. For example, Ding, W. Y., & Han, P. (2018). The Chinese Approach to Standard Essential Patents Protection: A Summary of the Seminar on Legal Issues in SEPs Protection. Law Application, (19), 146-150, Zhu, J. J. (2020). China Should Establish an Anti-suit Injunction System for Resolving Standard Essential Patents Disputes. Intellectual Property, (06), Nie, J. Q., & Pan, X. J. (2022). The Dilemma and Relief of the Application of Anti-suit Injunction in Transnational Litigations of Patents. Science Technology and Law, (04), 65, etc.
📄 Zhu, J. J. (2021). Conflicts and Countermeasures in the Issuance of Anti-suit Injunctions and Anti-anti-suit Injunctions for Standard Essential Patents. Intellectual Property, (06), 14-24.
📄 Referenced from the white paper The Facts and China’s Position on China-US Trade Friction, available on the official website of the State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China, http://www.scio.gov.cn/ztk/dtzt/37868/39004/39006/Document/1638353/1638353.htm，last visited on 2 March 2024.
📄 Xiao, Y. P. (2019). A Jurisprudential Analysis of "Long-Arm Jurisdiction" and Countermeasure Research. China Legal Science, (06), 39-65.
📄 Xia, W. (2023). The Essence, Causes and Trends of Anti-suit Injunctions in Standard Essential Patents Disputes.
📄 Social Science Front, (11).
📄 Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China. (2020). Civil Ruling of the Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme People's Court (I) (Nos. 732, 733, 734).
📄 Wuhan Intermediate People's Court of Hubei Province. (2020). Civil Ruling (First Instance Case - Intellectual Property, No. 743).
📄 Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court of Guangdong Province. (2018). Civil Ruling (First Instance Case I, No. 335).
📄 China–Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, Request for Consultations by the European Union, WTO Doc. WT/DS611/1 (18 February 2022). https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds611_e.htm, last
📄 visited on 28 December 2024.
📄 Yu, P. K., Contreras, J. L., & Yang, Y. Transplanting anti-suit injunctions (p. 1568).
📄 Elias, O. (1999). Private international law–Anti-suit injunctions: Airbus Industrie GIE v. Patel. Advances in Computers, 1999(22), 24–26. https://doi.org/10.14296/ac.v1999i22.1422
📄 South Carolina Insurance Co. v. Assurantie Maatschappij “De Zeven Provincien” NV, [1987] A.C. 24 (H.L.), 39
📄 (Lord Brandon).
📄 Gerdin, D., & Katsifis, D. (n.d.). Supra note ⑦ (p. 605).
📄 Allianz SpA, vormals Riunione Adriatica Di Sicurtà SpA u.a. v. West Tankers Inc., Case C-185/07, ECLI:EU:C:2009:69, [2009] NJW 165, [2009] EuZW 215.
📄 Du, H. F., & Duan, X. R. (2023). The Role and Application of International Comity in Transnational Anti-suit Injunctions. China University Social Sciences, (04), 96-110+157.
📄 Wuhan Intermediate People's Court of Hubei Province. (2020). Civil Ruling (First Instance Case - Intellectual Property, No. 169) (I) (II).
📄 Article 104 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, where the lawful rights and interests of an interested party will be irreparable damaged if an application for preservation is not filed immediately under urgent circumstances, the interested party may, before instituting an action or applying for arbitration, apply to the people's court at the place where the property to be preserved is located or at the place of domicile of the respondent or a people's court having jurisdiction over the case for taking preservative measures. The applicant shall provide security and, if the applicant fails to provide security, the people's court shall issue a ruling to dismiss the application. After accepting an application, a people's court must issue a ruling within 48 hours; and if it rules to take a preservative measure, the measure shall be executed immediately.
📄 Tan, Y. H. (2023). Study on Anti-suit Injunction in Standard Essential Patents Disputes. SJTU Law Review, (03), 150-164.
📄 Damien Geradin, Dimitrios Katsifis, (2022). “The Use and Abuse of Anti-Suit Injunctions in SEPs Litigation: Is There a Way Forward?”, GRUR International, Vol. 71, No. 7, pp. 614. https://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikac051, last visited on 28 December 2024.
📄 Bin, Y. C. (2021). Considerations and Safeguards in Behavior Preservation Rulings of Anti-suit Injunction Nature: An Interpretation of China's First Anti-suit Injunction Ruling in Intellectual Property Litigation. Law Application.
📄 Song, X.(2021). Judicial Methods for Anti-suit Injunctions in Foreign-Related Standard Essential Patents Disputes. Law Science.
📄 Zhu, J. J.(2021). Conflicts and Countermeasures in the Issuance of Anti-suit Injunctions and Anti-anti-suit Injunctions for Standard Essential Patents. Intellectual Property, (06), 14-24.
📄 See Unwired Planet International Ltd & Anor v Huawei Technologies Co Ltd & Ors [2017] EWHC 2831 (Pat), http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2017/2831.html, last visited on 28 December 2024.
📄 Zhang, J. R., & Fu, J. H.(2024). The Internal Logic of Global Governance of Anti-suit Injunctions for Standard Essential Patents. International Economic Law Review, (04), 113-124.
📄 Zhang, H. B., & Liu, S. L.(2023). Jurisdictional Disputes and Strategic Choices in Standard Essential Patents Licensing Disputes. International Economic Law Review.
📄 See Nokia Technologies OY & Nor v Oneplus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd & Ors (Rev1) [2021] EWHC 2952 (Pat). http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2021/2952.html，last visited on 28 December 2024.
📄 See Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court of Guangdong Province. (2020). Civil Ruling (First Instance Case - Civil, No. 689) (I). Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China. (2020). Civil Ruling of the Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme People's Court (Jurisdictional Appeal, Final, No. 517).
📄 Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme People’s Court of China. (2021). China's First Anti-Suit Injunction in Intellectual Property Adjudication: The Collegial Panel's Detailed Explanation of the Case Concerning Standard Essential Patents Licensing Disputes between Conversant Wireless Licensing S.à.r.l. and Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-1056.html, last visited on 29 July 2024.
📄 Fu, L., & Xu, Y. C. (2023). International Jurisdictional Disputes over Global Licensing of Standard Essential Patents and China's Response: With Comments on the Jurisdictional Objection Case of OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp, Ltd. and Sharp. Intellectual Property, (06), 68-85.
📄 Zhao, Q. X. (2021). Anti-suit Injunctions in Litigations over Standard Essential Patents. People's Judicature, (13), 90-94.
📄 Zhang, Y. R., & Li, J. C. (2022). An Empirical Study on the Influencing Factors of Anti-suit Injunctions in International Parallel Litigations over Standard Essential Patents. Forum on Science and Technology in China, (04), 142-152+178.
📄 The doctrine of forum non conveniens is an important principle in international civil litigation for determining a court's jurisdiction. It involves an assessment of whether a court that possesses jurisdiction is the most appropriate forum to hear the civil case. The doctrine aims to ensure that parties to international civil litigation can proceed in the most convenient and suitable court, thereby enhancing the fairness and efficiency of such proceedings.
📄 Song, J. L. (2023). The Construction of the Anti-suit Injunction System in Standard Essential Patents Litigation in
📄 China. China Law Review, (01).
📄 Article 51 of the Maritime Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, A maritime injunction means any of compulsory measures by which a maritime court, on application by a maritime claimant, orders an act or omission by the party who opposes the claim, in order to protect the lawful rights and interests of the maritime claimant against any infringement.
📄 Zhang, W. P. (2022). The Construction and Implementation of Anti-suit Injunctions in China. China Law Review, (02).
📄 Zheng, L. X., & Luo, X. C. (2024). On the Restraint of Anti-suit Injunctions in FRAND Litigation Concerning Standard Essential Patents. Qilu Journal, (04).

How to Cite

The Dilemma of Anti-Suit Injunctions in Cross-Border SEP Disputes: Challenges and Pathways for China. (2026). Global Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 5(03), 09-25. https://doi.org/10.55640/gjhss/Volume05Issue03-02

Similar Articles

1-10 of 25

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.