您当前的位置:首页 > 论文详情

论涉外知识产权诉讼的专属管辖——以《民事诉讼法》第279条第2款为中心

请选择邀稿期刊:

The Exclusive Jurisdiction of Foreign Intellectual Property Litigation——Centering on Article 279(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure

摘要: 《民事诉讼法》第279条第2款“注册性知识产权有效性争端”的专属管辖规则起源于知识产权的地域性特征,但同时也是地域性逐渐减弱的产物。该规则既可以支持本国法院采取禁诉令、否认管辖协议、拒绝判决的承认与执行等手段维护本国的管辖权,同时也要求本国不得对外国注册性知识产权的有效性争端行使管辖权。《民事诉讼法》第279条第2款在整体管辖体系之中承担着划分管辖“法域”的职责,此外也补足了管辖规则中较冲突法所缺失的“外国知识产权”调整对象。判断合同违约、侵权诉讼中出现有效性关联问题时是否属于该款所指的“有效性有关的纠纷”时,应在“权利稳定性抗辩”与“权利无效抗辩”中排除前者。并且在“标准必要专利”的许可费率纠纷中,该规则也存在适用空间,

Abstract: The exclusive jurisdiction rule of Article 279(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, "Disputes over the Validity of Registered Intellectual Property Rights", originated from the territorial character of intellectual property rights, but at the same time, it is also a product of the gradual diminution of territoriality. The rule can support the national courts to defend their jurisdiction by means of injunctions, denials of jurisdictional agreements, refusal of recognition and enforcement of judgments, etc., but at the same time, it also requires that the national courts shall not exercise jurisdiction over disputes over the validity of foreign registered intellectual property rights. Article 279(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure assumes the responsibility of delineating law district in the overall jurisdiction system, and also supplements the "foreign intellectual property rights" that are missing from the conflict of laws rules of jurisdiction. When judging whether the issue of validity in contract breach and infringement litigation belongs to the "validity-related disputes" referred to in this paragraph, the former should be excluded from the "defense of stability of rights" and "defense of invalidity of rights". There is also room for the application of this rule in disputes over license fees for "standard-essential patents".

版本历史

[V1] 2024-11-30 21:29:58 PSSXiv:202412.00263V1 下载全文
点击下载全文
在线阅读
许可声明
metrics指标
  •  点击量12
  •  下载量0
  • 评论量 0
评论
分享
邀请专家评阅
收藏