Collective jurisdiction over intellectual property (IP) appeal cases in a single court will promote unification of the judgment rules of IP cases in China, said Luo Dongchuan, chief judge of the Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme People's Court (SPC), in a recent interview with Southern Metropolitan Daily.

The founding of the Intellectual Property Court on Jan 1, 2019 in Beijing aims primarily to hear cases on appeal over patent and other intellectual property rights involving technologies.

Luo, also vice-president of the SPC, explained the background, functions and trial modes of the court as well as recruitment of judges during the interview.

According to Luo, the structure of intellectual property trial organs in China has been improved in the past 30 years since the first patent case was heard in February 1985. IP courts now cover all regions in the country, where IP divisions have been launched by the SPC, the high people's courts, more than 200 intermediate people's courts and over 160 basic courts. In 2014, IP courts were launched in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou. Since 2017, 19 IP courts have been established to handle cross-regional IP-related cases in a province. With the SPC's IP court launched this year, the appellate trial mechanism for IP cases at national level has been fundamentally completed, Luo explained.

Luo said although judicial interpretations and guiding cases have promoted unification of judgments of intellectual property rights, the problems of different judgment rules on similar cases and complexities of IP litigation procedures are still prominent in judicial practice.

Jurisdiction of IP-related appeal cases in a single court will improve trial efficiency and shorten the handling period of patent-related cases. The court promoted the adoption of information technology including virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR) and video transmission with remote high definition zoom in order to overcome the difficulties in cross-examination of physical evidence in patent cases and to improve trial efficiency. 

In addition, online systems of transmitting electronic litigation materials and electronic service of judgments, as well as the platform that integrates all kinds of judicial administration information such as case limits, requirments of litigation procedure, and judgment templates, are under exploration and development. 

A database of typical cases will also be built for courts nationwide to share the benefits of judicial resources so as to improve trial quality and efficiency of IP cases at national level.

Innovating judicial working mechanisms and promoting informatization, as well as deepening judicial reform, play key roles in improving trial quality and efficiency. For instance, the "split-flow" model, categorizing complicated and simple cases into different handling tracks, is one of the main measures the court should promote, Luo stressed.

As the number of IP-related cases grows, proper personnel allocation of trials is a must. Enlarging teams of professional judges is also a way to enhance the efficiency and quality of IP trials. 

The judging team is expanding, he said. "According to statistics, there are more than 5,000 IP judicial officers nationwide, including judges, judge assistants, technicians and court clerks, most of them have college degree or even higher." 

Luo explained that the chief judge of the IP Court is the vice-president of the SPC while three outsanding judges with rich judical experince have been appointed as deputy chief judges. Most judicial staffers of IP Court are selected from lower courts in East China, where trial mechanisms of IP-related cases are mature. The selected staff members will work for the court for one to two years and then be screened by an assessment before becoming the full time members of IP Court.

According to Luo, professional personnel should be in charge of professional cases. 

As IP-related cases involve a great deal of professional technological knowledge, "every judge of the court holds a master degree or even higher, one third of them with science and engineering background and one fourth with overseas academic background."

Luo also pointed out that compared to disputes over tangible property, cases related to infringment of intellectual property rights are non-physical and more uncertain and complicated, which makes the cost of rights protection much higher.

Luo suggested that regulations on compensation for infringements of intellectual property rights should be made at the legislative level and tougher punishments should be imposed.