Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Matters Concerning the Application of Law in the
Trial of Cases Involving the Disputes over Infringement upon the Rights of New Plant Varieties
(Adopted at the 1411th meeting of the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People's Court on December 25, 2006)
For the purpose of correctly hearing the cases involving the disputes over infringement upon the rights of new plant varieties, and in accordance with the General Principles of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China and the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, several issues concerning the specific application of law are prescribed as follows in combination with the trial experiences and actual circumstances on the cases involving the disputes over infringement upon the rights of new plant varieties:
Article 1 In case of any infringement upon the rights to new plant varieties as regarded by the owner of rights to new plant varieties (hereinafter referred to as the owner of varieties) or interested person , he may raise an action to the people's court.
Interested person as referred to in the preceding Paragraph comprises the licensee of the license contract on implementing new plant varieties and the lawful heir of property rights to varieties, etc..
The licensee of an exclusive licensing contract may raise an action to the people's court independently. The licensee of a sole licensing contract may, jointly with the owner of the variety, raise an action, or may raise an action independently if the said owner may not do so. And the licensee of a common licensing contract may raise an action upon explicit authorization of the owner of the variety.
Article 2 Where the propagation materials of an authorized variety are produced or sold for commercial purpose, or are repeatedly used for producing the propagation materials of another variety for commercial purpose without the permission of the owner of the variety, the people's court shall ascertain the infringement upon the rights to new plant varieties.
Where the feature or characteristic of the infringing variety as charged is identical with that of an authorized variety, or the difference of feature or characteristic between the said two varieties are generated not by genetic variation, the people's court shall ascertain in general that the infringing variety as charged falls into the propagation materials of the authorized variety produced or sold for commercial purpose.
If the infringer repeatedly uses the propagation materials of an authorized variety as the parents for separate propagation with other parents, the people's court shall generally ascertain that the propagation materials of the authorized variety are repeatedly used for producing the propagation materials of another variety for commercial purpose.
Article 3 As for a specific issue that is involved in a case of dispute over the rights to new plant varieties requiring for appraisal, it shall be appraised by a qualified appraisal institution and appraisers as affirmed upon negotiations by both parties concerned. If the negotiations fail, the people's court shall appoint a qualified appraisal institution and appraisers for performing the appraisal.
In case of no appraisal institution or appraisers as prescribed in the preceding Paragraph, it shall be appraised by a professional institution and professionals with a variety detection technical level accordingly.
Article 4 As for the specific issues that are involved in the cases of disputes over the rights to new plant varieties, the appraisals shall be performed by way of field observation and measurement and genetic fingerprint detection, or other related methods.
As for the appraisal conclusions made by the methods as prescribed in the preceding Paragraph, the people's court shall cross-examine for affirming the weight of proof thereof.
Article 5 When the owner of a variety or interested person raises an action to the people's court for the infringement upon the rights to new plant varieties, if he require for stopping the infringement upon the rights to new plant varieties in advance or the evidence preservation at the same time, the people's court may make a decision previously upon examination.
The people's court may, in accordance with the specific circumstances on the case, invite related professional technicians to assist in the evidence collection under technical procedures accordingly when taking the measures for evidence preservation,.
Article 6 When the people's court hears the cases of disputes over the infringement upon the rights to new plant varieties, it shall order the infringer to stop the infringement, make compensation for the losses or bear other civil liabilities in accordance with Article 134 of the General Principles of the Civil Law and in combination with the specific conditions of the cases.
The people's court may determine the damages in light of the losses of the infringee due to the infringement or the interests of the infringer from the infringement upon request of the infringee. In case the infringee requires to decide the damages according to the licensing fee for implementing the new plant variety, the damages may be determined reasonably by the people's court subject to the type, time and scope, etc. for the licensing use of the new plant variety and with reference to the fee for licensing use of the new plant variety.
In case it is difficult to determine the damages in accordance with the preceding paragraph, the damages may be determined by the people's court under RMB 500,000 yuan with comprehensive consideration in terms of the nature, duration, and influences of the infringement, the amount for licensing use of the new plant variety, the type, time, and scope for licensing use of the new plant variety, and the proper expenses paid by the infringee for investigating and stopping the infringement.
Article 7 Where both the infringee and the infringer agree to make the infringing objects into the money and use it for compensating for the losses suffered by the infringee, the people's court shall permit it. Where either the infringee or the infringer does not agree with the said deduction, the people's court shall order the infringer to eliminate the activity of the infringing goods and make them unable to be the propagation materials upon request of the related person.
In case the infringing goods are in the stage of growth or the destruction of the infringing goods will lead to major unfavorable influences, the method of ordering the destruction of the infringing goods may not be adopted by the people's court, unless it is otherwise prescribed by the laws or administrative regulations.
Article 8 Where any individual or rural household for contracted management that engages in agriculture, or forestry, crop farming accepts the entrustment of someone else for reproducing the propagation materials that infringe upon the rights to varieties, and does not know that the goods entrusted for propagation are the propagation materials infringing upon the rights to varieties, and has made out the trustor, the liability of compensation may not be born.
最高人民法院公告
《最高人民法院关于审理侵犯植物 新品种权纠纷案件具体应用法律问题的若干规定》已于2006年12月25日由最高人民法院审判委员会第1411次会议通过，现予公布，自2007年2月1 日起施行。 最高人民法院 二○○六年十一月二十二日
最高人民法院关于审理侵犯植物新品种权纠纷案件具体应用法律问题的若干规定
（2006年12月25日最高人民法院审判委员会第1411次会议通过）
法释（2007）1号
为正确处理侵犯植物新品种权纠纷案件，根据《中华人民共和国民法通则》、 《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》等有关规定，结合侵犯植物新品种权纠纷案件的审判经验和实际情况，就具体应用法律的若干问题规定如下： 第一条 植物新品种权所有人（以下称品种权人）或者利害关系人认为植物新品种权受到侵犯的，可以依法向人民法院提起诉讼。 前款所称利害关 系人，包括植物新品种实施许可合同的被许可人、品种权财产权利的合法继承人等。 独占实施许可合同的被许可人可以单独向人民法院提起诉讼；排 他实施许可合同的被许可人可以和品种权人共同起诉，也可以在品种权人不起诉时，自行提起诉讼；普通实施许可合同的被许可人经品种权人明确授权，可以提起诉 讼。 第二条 未经品种权人许可，为商业目的生产或销售授权品种的繁殖材料，或者为商业目的将授权品种的繁殖材料重复使用于生产另一 品种的繁殖材料的，人民法院应当认定为侵犯植物新品种权。 被控侵权物的特征、特性与授权品种的特征、特性相同，或者特征、特性的不同是因非 遗传变异所致的，人民法院一般应当认定被控侵权物属于商业目的生产或者销售授权品种的繁殖材料。 被控侵权人重复以授权品种的繁殖材料为亲本 与其他亲本另行繁殖的，人民法院一般应当认定属于商业目的将授权品种的繁殖材料重复使用于生产另一品种的繁殖材料。 第三条 侵犯植 物新品种权纠纷案件涉及的专门性问题需要鉴定的，由双方当事人协商确定的有鉴定资格的鉴定机构、鉴定人鉴定；协商不成的，由人民法院指定的有鉴定资格的鉴 定机构、鉴定人鉴定。 没有前款规定的鉴定机构、鉴定人的，由具有相应品种检测技术水平的专业机构、专业人员鉴定。 第 四条 对于侵犯植物新品种权纠纷案件涉及的专门性问题可以采取田间观察检测、基因指纹图谱检测等方法鉴定。 对采取前款规定方法作出的鉴定结 论，人民法院应当依法质证，认定其证明力。 第五条 品种权人或者利害关系人向人民法院提起侵犯植物新品种权诉讼时，同时提出先行停 止侵犯植物新品种权行为或者保全证据请求的，人民法院经审查可以先行作出裁定。 人民法院采取证据保全措施时，可以根据案件具体情况，邀请有 关专业技术人员按照相应的技术规程协助取证。 第六条 人民法院审理侵犯植物新品种权纠纷案件，应当依照民法通则第一百三十四条的规 定，结合案件具体情况，判决侵权人承担停止侵害、赔偿损失等民事责任。 人民法院可以根据被侵权人的请求，按照被侵权人因侵权所受损失或者侵 权人因侵权所得利益确定赔偿数额。被侵权人请求按照植物新品种实施许可费确定赔偿数额的，人民法院可以根据植物新品种实施许可的种类、时间、范围等因素， 参照该植物新品种实施许可费合理确定赔偿数额。 依照前款规定难以确定赔偿数额的，人民法院可以综合考虑侵权的性质、期间、后果，植物新品种 实施许可费的数额，植物新品种实施许可的种类、时间、范围及被侵权人调查、制止侵权所支付的合理费用等因素，在50万元以下确定赔偿数额。 第七条 被侵权人和侵权人均同意将侵权物折价抵扣被侵权人所受损失的，人民法院应当准许。被侵权人或者侵权人不同意折价抵扣的，人民法院依照当事人的请 求，责令侵权人对侵权物作消灭活性等使其不能再被用作繁殖材料的处理。 侵权物正处于生长期或者销毁侵权物将导致重大不利后果的，人民法院可 以不采取责令销毁侵权物的方法，但法律、行政法规另有规定的除外。 第八条 以农业或者林业种植为业的个人、农村承包经营户接受他人 委托代为繁殖侵犯品种权的繁殖材料，不知道代繁物是侵犯品种权的繁殖材料并说明委托人的，不承担赔偿责任。