China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

SPC Revises Judicial Interpretation on Anti-Unfair Competition Law

Mon, 11 Apr 2022
Categories: China Legal Trends

On 17 March 2022, China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) issued the “Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the PRC Anti-Unfair Competition Law” (hereinafter “the Interpretation”, 关于适用<中华人民共和国反不正当竞争法>若干问题的解释), with effect on 20 March 2022.

Prior to the Interpretation, the SPC issued the “Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Civil Cases Involving Unfair Competition” (关于审理不正当竞争民事案件应用法律若干问题的解释) in 2017, which was replaced by this newly-released juridical Interpretation in 2022.

With 29 articles, the Interpretation provides guidance to Chinese judges regarding the application of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. The highlights are as follows.

1. It clarifies the scope of application of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law

The Interpretation stipulates that, where an act of unfair competition is not construed as an act of infringement under the Patent Law, the Trademark Law or the Copyright Law, the Anti-Unfair Competition Law shall apply. This regulation has solved the overlap of the aforementioned laws.

2. It refines the criteria for determining “counterfeit and confusion”

To implement Article 6 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, the Interpretation uses 11 articles to refine the rules in determining “counterfeit and confusion” from the following three aspects.

First, it specifies the circumstances under which the court may find that the business operator has committed any acts of confusion, sufficient to mislead consumers into believing that the goods belong to or are specifically related to another party.

Second, it made clear the circumstances under which the court may find that the business operator has committed untrue or misleading commercial publicity to defraud or mislead the consumers.

Third, it also lays out the circumstances under which the court may find that the online operator has utilized technology to interfere with or sabotage the legitimate online business of other business operators.

 

 

Cover Photo by Cajeo Zhang on Unsplash

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

Save as PDF

Related laws on China Laws Portal

You might also like

China Launches Gradual Retirement Reform

China's National People's Congress has approved a gradual increase in the statutory retirement age for men and women, set to begin on January 1, 2025, marking the first adjustment in over 70 years.

China Revises National Defense Education Law

In September 2024, the newly revised “National Defense Education Law of the People’s Republic of China” was passed by the National People’s Congress Standing Committee and came into effect on 21 September.

SPC Releases Typical Cases to Support Hong Kong Arbitration

In September 2024, China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) released six typical cases to demonstrate its support for Hong Kong arbitration, emphasizing judicial cooperation and the recognition of arbitral awards to foster international arbitration development.

SPC Sets Standards for Punitive Damages in Food Safety

In August 2024, China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) issued a judicial interpretation that addresses punitive damages in food safety cases, featuring typical cases to establish uniform standards and enhance consumer protection.

Authenticating Documents for Use in Chinese Courts: Apostille or Not?

The 1961 Apostille Convention, effective in China as of November 2023, simplifies the authentication of foreign documents for use in Chinese courts by replacing traditional consular legalization with apostille. Note that authentication is only required for certain types of documents under Chinese law, and the apostille process applies only when the 1961 Convention is relevant.

SPP Releases 2024 Mid-Year Case Data

In the first half of 2024, China's Supreme People's Procuratorate (SPP) reported significant increases in arrests and prosecutions, as well as a notable rise in retrials based on their recommendations in civil cases.