I. Procedure in intellectual property cases - UK 1.知识产权案件的程序-英国 Daniel Alexander QC 丹尼尔·亚历山大 英国王室法律顾问 Barrister, Visiting Professor of Law, University College, London 大律师，伦敦大学学院法学客座教授 IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

Registered rights 已注册权利 Patents 专利 Infringement and revocation or amendment of UK and EP patents. 英国和欧洲专利的侵权、撤销或修正 Designs 外观设计 Infringement and revocation of UK and EU registered designs (also infringement of unregistered design right). 英国和欧洲注册外观设计的侵权和撤销（以及未注册外观设计侵权） Trade marks 商标 Infringement and revocation/invalidity of UK and EU trade marks. 英国和欧洲商标的侵权和撤销/无效 IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

Unregistered rights 未注册权利 Copyright 版权 Infringement of copyright and unregistered design right. 侵犯版权和未注册外观设计权利 Infringement of related rights (e.g. recording rights, performers’ rights and moral rights). 侵犯邻接权（例如录制权、表演者权和精神权利） Claims relating to collective licensing. 与集体许可有关的权利主张 Passing off (misrepresentation damaging to claimant’s goodwill). 假冒（对权利人商誉构成损害的误述） Confidential information (including trade secrets). 秘密信息（包括交易秘密） IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

First Instance – (1) High Court 一审-（1）高级法院 UK Civil Procedure is governed by the Civil Procedure Rules./英国民事程序由民事诉讼规则调整 CPR Part 63 and Practice Direction is specially relevant to intellectual property cases: 民事诉讼法第63部分和实践指南是与知识产权案件专门相关的 References/参见:www.justice.gov.uk/civil/procrules_fin/contents/parts/part63.htm www.justice.gov.uk/civil/procrules_fin/contents/practice_directions/pd_part63.htm High Court – first instance for most intellectual property cases./高级法院-负责绝大多数知识产权案件的一审 Specialist division of the High Court – chancery division (for copyright, trade mark and design cases), Patents Court (for patent cases and certain others)./高级法院的专家法庭-衡平法庭（负责版权、商标和外观设计案件）、专利法庭（负责专利案件和特定其他案件） Most judges are former barristers who have undertaken intellectual property cases. 绝大多数法官是以前曾经代理知识产权案件的大律师 All highly technical patent cases are heard by a judge with some former experience in the area./所以高技术专利案件有具有该领域一定经验的法官庭审 In complex cases the court may appoint a scientific advisor, who takes no part in the decision but who can advise the judge on technical issues. Rare to have “court experts”. 在复杂案件中，法院可以任命一名科学顾问，他在决定中不起任何作用但可以就技术问题向法官提出建议。很少有“法庭专家”。 IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

First instance (2) – Patents County Court 一审（2）-县专利法院 Specialist court for lower value patent and other intellectual property cases. 负责低价值专利和其他知识产权案件的专家法院 Financial limit – proposed to be £500,000. 资金限制-建议是£500,000 Cases supposed to be no longer than 1-2 days. 案件通常不超过1-2天 Specialist judge – also former barrister. 专家法官-也是前大律师 Fixed costs regime (maximum £50,000). 固定的费用制度（最多£50,000） Possibility of transfer between High Court and Patents County Court. 在高级法院和县专利法院之间移交案件的可能性 Like High Court, usually sits in London. 如同高级法院一样，一般设置在伦敦 IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

Criminal enforcement 刑事执法 Certain infringements (esp. copyright and trade mark infringement) are also criminal offences, attracting prison sentences in serious counterfeiting cases. 特定的侵权（尤其是版权和商标侵权）也是犯罪行为，在严重假冒案件中导致被判入狱 Cases tried in the ordinary criminal courts in the more serious cases with a judge and jury (of 12 citizens). 案件中普通刑事法院审判，在更严重的案件中有一个法官和（12名公民组成的）陪审团 Appeals are to the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division). 上诉于上诉法院（刑庭） Much higher standard of proof than for civil cases -“beyond reasonable doubt”. 比民事案件更高的证明标准-“排除合理怀疑” Cases are generally brought by local authorities’ trading standards enforcement authorities. 案件一般由地方机构的贸易标准执行部门提起 IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

Appeals – second instance 上诉-二审 Appeal to Court of Appeal. 上诉于上诉法院 Court of Appeal is 3-person court, mainly former judges of the High Court. Sits in London. 上诉法院是3人法庭，主要是高级法院的前法官，位于伦敦 Appeals require permission of lower court or Court of Appeal and may be on fact or law. However, very difficult to overturn a decision of primary fact or where the trial judge has to perform a complex evaluation (e.g. whether an invention was obvious). 上诉须征得低级或上诉法院的许可，并且可以基于事实或法律问题。但是，推翻一项关于主要事实的决定或者主审法官需要进行复杂评估（例如一项发明是否是显而易见的）的决定非常困难。 Permission will almost always be given if a point is important or is a point of law (such as the interpretation of a patent). 如果某一点十分重要或是法律争点（例如关于专利的解释），上诉许可几乎都会被给予。 IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

Supreme Court and European Court of Justice 最高法院和欧洲法院 UK Supreme Court is third instance of appeal and appeals almost always require permission from the Supreme Court. Decides questions of general principle. Appeals at this level in IP cases are rare (1-2 p.a.). 英国最高法院是上诉的第三审并且上诉几乎都需要最高法院的许可。决定一般原则问题。知识产权案件上诉到这一层级的极少（每年1-2件） Recent examples: /最近的例子： Approach to novelty of pharmaceutical patents (Lundbeck)./关于药品专利新颖性的途径(Lundbeck). Determination of entitlement to a patent (Yeda)./一项专利权属的决定(Yeda) European Court of Justice decides questions of interpretation of EU law which may be referred by national courts./欧洲法院决定可能被国内法院参考的欧盟法律的解释 Recent examples of questions referred: /最近涉及的问题范例： scope of copyright protection for computer software (SAS);/计算机软件的版权保护范围(SAS); right to supplementary protection certificates for combination products (Georgetown);/关于组合产品补充保护证书的权利(Georgetown); approach to protection in sale of satellite TV decoder cards (BSkyB)./卫星电视解码器卡销售中的保护途径(BSkyB) Note: EU law of very great importance in intellectual property in the EU (and therefore UK). Most of UK trade mark and copyright law has been harmonised by the EU and some of patent law (SPCs and biotechnological invention protection). /注意：欧盟法律在欧盟知识产权中非常重要（因此在英国也是）。英国商标法和版权法的大部分和专利法的部分（药品补充保护证书和生物技术发明专利保护）都被欧盟协调过。 IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

UK – civil procedure in patent cases 英国-专利案件中的民事程序 Infringement and validity are heard together by same court and usually at the same time. (Compare German procedure where infringement and validity are heard in different courts at different times)./侵权和有效性由同一法庭审理并且通常在同一时间（相比而言，德国的程序侵权和有效性由不同的法庭在不同时间审理） Evidence usually includes experts for the parties. Court experts are rare./证据通常包括当事人各方的专家。法庭的专家非常少见。 Initial statements of case are short (e.g. only citations of prior art)./案件的初始陈述很简短（例如仅仅是现有技术的引证） About 2 months prior to trial the parties exchange expert and factual evidence, often with reply evidence about a month from trial./审判前两个月左右当事人交换专家和事实证据，通常自审判时一个月有回应证据 Cross-examination of witnesses almost always takes place and results in longer trials. Witnesses in complex cases are sometimes cross-examined for 1-2 days. There is a procedure for compelling the attendance of fact witnesses. 证人的交叉询问几乎总会发生并且导致更长时间的审判。复杂案件中的证人有时会被交叉询问1-2天。有程序迫使事实证人的出席。 Full legal argument is submitted close to trial or sometimes only after cross-examination./完全的法律主张在接近审判时提交或有时仅仅是在交叉询问后提交。 Judgment is usually given in writing in 1-3 months but this may be longer./判决一般在1-3个月但可能更长的时间内以书面方式作出。 Following judgment, there is a further hearing to consider relief (injunctions, damages and costs)./判决之后还有一个后续的审理来考虑救济（禁令、损害赔偿和费用） Time to trial is usually c. 1 year. Appeals are usually heard in about 1 year to 18 months from the judgment. 审判等待时间通常是1年。上诉的审理一般自判决时起1年到18个月。 Other intellectual property cases are similar but the time to trial can be shorter. In certain cases, it is possible to obtain an expedited trial (within 2-6 months)./其他知识产权案件情况类似但审判等待时间可能短一些。在特定案件中，有可能获得提前审判（在2-6个月内） IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

Cost and delay 费用和延迟 Cost of UK patent proceedings generally high – but not a new problem. 英国专利诉讼程序的费用一般较高-但不是一个新问题 “It used to be said that there was something catching about a horse case: that it made the witnesses perjure themselves as a matter of course. It seems to me that there is something catching in a patent case, which is that it makes everybody argue and ask questions to an interminable extent – a patent case with no more difficult question to try than any other case instead of lasting six hours is invariably made to last at least six days, if not twelve. I am sure there ought to be some remedy for it.” Lord Esher in Ungar v. Sugg (1892) 9 RPC 113 at 116, a case quoted in Nicha v. Argos [2007] EWCA Civ. 741. “以前总说赛马案引人入胜：在这类案件中证人当然会做假证。对我而言，专利案件也引人入胜，因为遇到这样的案件，大家就争论不休，问个没完没了——一个普通的专利案子，本来六个小时就可以审结，非得六天，如果不是12天的话。我确信，对此应采取某种救济。” Lord Esher in Ungar v. Sugg (1892) 9 RPC 113 at 116，一个在Nicha v. Argos [2007] EWCA Civ. 741中被引用的案例 IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

Special features of UK patent cases 英国专利案件的特殊性 In the UK “squeeze” arguments are common – where a defendant argues that if the patent is interpreted broadly it is invalid in the light of the prior art. It is not possible in England to argue that a patent should be given a broad interpretation to catch an infringer but a narrow interpretation to avoid prior art./在英国“挤压”抗辩很常见——被告辩称：如果专利被广义解释，根据现有技术它就是无效的。在英国，不能为了抓住侵权人而对专利做广义解释，同时为了避开现有技术作狭义解释。 In the UK, unlike the US, the issue of interpretation is decided at the full trial not at a hearing before the trial. 在英国，与美国不同的，解释问题是在庭审过程中而不是审判前的听证中决定的。 Disclosure is often ordered even on obviousness (Nichia v. Argos). A party is obliged to give disclosure even of confidential documents which are damaging to their own case and their own lawyers are responsible for ensuring that the party gives full disclosure. A lawyer can be disciplined if he or she helps a party to suppress a relevant document. /即使是对于显而易见性，也要求披露。 (Nichia v. Argos)一方被迫使披露即使是有损于他们自己案件的保密文件，并且他们的律师有责任确保当事人进行了完整披露。律师可以被惩戒，如果他或她帮助当事人隐藏相关文件。 Disclosure is an important general feature of English litigation, not just in intellectual property cases./披露是英国诉讼的一个重要的一般性特征，不只是在知识产权案件中。 Experimental proof has a formal procedure. Experiments cannot be admitted in evidence without the permission of the court and the other side has a right to see the experiments repeated./实验证据有一个正式程序。实验在没有法庭同意的情况不能被承认为证据，并且另一方有要求看到实验再现的权利。 A streamlined procedure is available for simple cases./简单案件适用简易程序。 Costs are very high compared with other EU jurisdictions but low compared with the US. The main costs are on preparation of expert evidence and the time in trial. A successful party has the right to claim costs from the loser (usually c. 70% of actual costs)./成本与欧盟其他国家相比很高但低于美国。主要成本用于准备专家证据和审判时间。胜诉方有权向败诉方主张费用（通常是实际费用的70%) IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

Example of patent case - Ancon v. ACS 专利案件的实例-Ancon 诉ACS References: First Instance (Patten J), [2008] EWHC 2489 (Pat); Court of Appeal [2009] EWCA Civ 498 (see www.bailli.org) 参考：一审(Patten J), [2008] EWHC 2489 (Pat); 上诉法院[2009] EWCA Civ 498 (见 www.bailli.org) Patent concerned a new kind of fixing for attaching cladding to buildings. 关于一种固定建筑物附加包层的专利 Main issue was infringement but claim for invalidity heard at the same time. 主要问题是侵权但无效主张同时被审理 Note: impact of interpretation on validity issue. 注意：关于有效性问题解释的影响 Note: importance of cross-examination of experts. 注意：对专家交叉询问的重要性 IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

Mediation and arbitration 调解和仲裁 Procedure and timing still, to some extent, under parties’ control./程序和时间仍然在一定程度上置于当事人的控制之下。 Adversarial challenge to other side’s case in cross-examination remains fundamental. 交叉询问这一对抗性特征不变。 The court encourages, but does not force, mediation to resolve disputes./法院鼓励，但不强迫，以调解解决纠纷。 There are many trained mediators, some with specialist technical or industry knowledge. 有许多训练有素的调解员，一些拥有专业技术或产业知识。 Court will stay proceedings to enable mediation to take place and if a party refuses to mediate without good reason, they can be deprived of costs./法庭会中止程序以使调解可以展开；如果一方无正当理由拒绝调解，他们可以被要求承担诉讼费用。 There is also considerable arbitration of intellectual property disputes – patent licence agreements, trade mark and franchise agreements etc. Arbitrations take place under the rules of the ICC, LCIA and other international bodies. Many involve UK counsel or arbitrators./知识产权纠纷也有数量可观的仲裁——专利许可协议、商标和特许经营协议等等。仲裁在国际商会仲裁院、伦敦商会仲裁院和其他国际机构的规则下展开，许多包括英国顾问和仲裁员。 IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

Intellectual property offices in dispute resolution 纠纷解决方面的知识产权办公室 Patents/专利 EPC provides a procedure for opposition to a EP patent within 9 months from grant./欧洲专利公约提供了从授权之日起9个月内对欧洲专利提起异议的程序 Often, final resolution of oppositions is slow after appeals. Some can take 5-8 years and a few have not been resolved even upon expiry./通常，上诉后，异议的最终解决十分缓慢。一些案件可以花费5-8年时间，并且少数直到期限届满以后尚未解决。 UK Intellectual Property Office has jurisdiction to resolve invalidity cases and infringement with agreement of parties but these are comparatively rare./英国知识产权局有权处理无效案件，并在当事人合意的情况下有权处理侵权案件，但这相对较少。 UK IPO hears cases concerning entitlement./英国知识产权局审理与专利权属有关的案件 Trade marks and designs/商标和外观设计 UK IPO has parallel jurisdiction with the High Court to hear trade mark invalidity cases (including revocation for non use of a registered mark). It also has a specialist tribunal for hearing disputes concerning original registration./英国知识产权局与高级法院对商标无效案件（包括因不使用注册商标而撤销的案件）享有平行的管辖权。它还有专家审判委员会审理与原始注册有关的纠纷。 Copyright tribunal/版权审判委员会 Specialist “Copyright Tribunal” hears cases concerning the licensing of music and other rights to ensure that recording companies do not abuse their monopolies in licensing./专家“版权审判委员会”审理与音乐和其他权利许可有关的案件以确保唱片公司不会在许可中滥用它们的垄断地位。 IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

Role of UK IPO in litigation 英国知识产权局在诉讼中的角色 The judiciary is independent of Government (and often decides cases against it – not only in IP but also in cases involving fundamental human rights and constitutional principle). 司法机构是独立于政府（并且经常决定反对政府的案件——不只是在知识产权而且在涉及基本人权和宪法原则的案件中） Some IP cases involve questions of general principle and the IPO sometimes intervenes and makes representations to the court even in a case between private parties. Other private parties are also able to intervene in certain cases if the case affects them sufficiently. 一些知识产权案件涉及一般原则问题，知识产权局有时介入并向法庭作出陈述，即使是在私人之间的案件中。其他私人主体也能够介入特定案件，如果该案件对他们产生了足够的影响。 Sometimes the UK Government is a defendant in IP proceedings (e.g. where a question arises as to non implementation of EU law)./有时英国政府在知识产权诉讼中是被告（例如当不执行欧盟法律的问题出现时） Example: /例子： The UK was sued by a number of recording companies for damages of £10s million for alleged failure properly to implement a EU Directive relating to exceptions to copyright protection./英国被大批唱片公司起诉要求赔偿1.05亿英镑的损失，因为其涉嫌未能适当执行与版权保护例外相关的欧盟指令。 The UK was also sued in a related case by the EU Commission for alleged failure to implement/late implementation./英国也在一起相关案件中被欧盟委员会起诉因其涉嫌执行不作为或滞后执行。 IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010 IPR2 -民事诉讼法研讨会-2010

Thank you 谢谢！ IPR2 - Workshop on Civil Procedure Law – 2010