国产99视频免费精品是看6,午夜福利区免费久久,日韩精品免费无码专区,国产乱理伦片在线观看夜h

China Justice Observer

中司觀察

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”, 關(guān)于適用<中華人民共和國反不正當(dāng)競爭法>若干問題的解釋), 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” (關(guān)于審理不正當(dāng)競爭民事案件應(yīng)用法律若干問題的解釋) 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

Beyond the Memorandum: Shanghai Court Enforces Singapore Judgment by Confirming “Reciprocal Consensus” Under China’s New Framework

On January 8, 2025, the Shanghai International Commercial Court recognized and enforced a Singapore High Court monetary judgment in Zhao v Ye (2023) Hu 01 Xie Wai Ren No. 28. It marks the first judicial confirmation of “reciprocal consensus” between China and Singapore under the 2022 reciprocity criteria, based on the China-Singapore Memorandum of Guidance (MOG).

SPC Issues New Rules for Government Information Disclosure Cases

In May 2025, China's Supreme People's Court (SPC) issued a new judicial interpretation, replacing its 2011 predecessor to standardize adjudication of government information disclosure cases and safeguard citizens' right to know by clarifying trial standards, defendant identification, burden of proof, and preventive relief.

China's Top Court Releases Minor Protection Cases

China's Supreme People's Court (SPC) released five typical cases to strengthen holistic judicial protection for minors, exemplifying the "best interests of the child" principle through integrated criminal, civil, and administrative proceedings.