Article 64 of China's Civil Procedure Law says a party shall be responsible for providing evidence to support its own propositions. But it's not always clear how far that's applicable in IP cases, as Yin Xintian explains.
Also known as “he who asserts, proves”, Article 64 is one of the fundamental principles of civil proceedings in China.
Based on this principle, a patentee who accuses another party of infringing his patent shall have to prove (i) what patent he owns and what is the status of that patent; (ii) what the alleged infringer did; and (iii) that the subject matter of the alleged infringing activity falls into the scope of protection for the patent.
When a patented process for obtaining a product is involved, however, it is often difficult for the patentee to prove that the alleged infringer is manufacturing the product using the patented process, as it is unlikely that the patentee can enter the alleged infringer’s premises to collect evidence.
To continue reading, you need a subscription to WIPR. Start a subscription to WIPR for £455.
In-house feature articles, the archive and expert comment require a paid subscription. Subscribe now.
Want to give it a try? We are offering a two week free trial to the WIPR website – register and select “Free Trial” to begin access to the full WIPR archive and read the latest news, features and expert comment. Begin your free trial here.
Is your 2 week free trial about to end? Upgrade to a 12 month subscription for £455 now.
If you have already subscribed please login.
If you have any technical issues please email James Lynn on firstname.lastname@example.org.
burden of proof, SPC, China Civil Procedure Law, China Patent Law