Header graphic for print

China Law Insight

China Depth, International Expertise

Reading the Tea Leaves – Managing Regulatory Risks in China

Posted in Global Network

By Martyn Huckerby and Intan Eow  King & Wood Mallesons

huckerby_martynOver the last 12 months a number of Australian corporates have suffered unexpected business disruption in China. For some affected entities, this has caused serious crisis at home, including the risk of class action alleging failure to adequately disclose risk and changing circumstances to the investment community. These developments have highlighted the importance of directors of Australian corporates with extensive business in China in understanding emerging regulatory and political issues in China and monitoring risks. Continue Reading

预测未来:应对中国的监管风险

Posted in Global Network

作者:贺墨亭(Martyn Huckerby) 杨映丹(Intan Eow)金杜律师事务所

huckerby_martyn过去一年,许多澳大利亚公司在中国遭遇始料未及的业务冲击。一些公司还因此在澳大利亚陷入严重危机,包括可能面临集体诉讼,被指控未向投资人充分披露风险和情势变化。从这些情况可以看出,对于在中国广泛开展业务的澳大利亚公司而言,董事能否了解中国的最新监管和政治问题并监控风险至关重要。

主要监管和政治风险

即便进行了预测,某家知名澳大利亚公司的前首席执行官可能也无法避免库存和市场份额下降的经营问题。但公司在中国经营,就需要以科学的方式为未来做好准备。至少有一件事情可以确定,过去一年的波动在2017年还将继续: Continue Reading

车同轨、书同文——从反垄断视角谈《汽车销售管理办法》修订

Posted in Antitrust & Competition, Antitrust & International Trade

作者:宁宣凤 刘成 尹冉冉 张若寒 刘胜蓝

ning_susanuntitledyin_hazel新管理办法出台背景 

2017年4月14日,商务部正式公布《汽车销售管理办法》(下称“新《管理办法》”),自2017年7月1日起施行,同时废止2005年颁布的《汽车品牌销售管理实施办法》(下称“《品牌销售管理办法》”)。新《管理办法》从销售行为规范、销售市场秩序、监督管理、法律责任四个主要方面明确了汽车流通环节中汽车供应商、经销商、售后服务商等各方的权利和义务。  Continue Reading

Patent Disputes and Article 24 of Judicial Interpretation II

Posted in International Trade

by Li Zhongsheng, King & Wood Mallesons’ IP group

li_zhongshengOn behalf of Qualcomm Incorporated, King & Wood Mallesons (“KWM”) recently asserted several standard essential patents (SEPs) against Meizu, a Zhuhai-based handset manufacturer. Meizu concluded a license agreement with Qualcomm on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms, in settlement of the royalty dispute after it was threatened with an injunction.. Article 24 of the Supreme People’s Court Interpretation of Issues of Application of Laws in the Handling of Patent Infringement Disputes (II) (“Judicial Interpretation II”) was the legal basis on which Qualcomm accused Meizu of patent infringement. This essay is a preliminary consideration of that article.

Article 24 of Judicial Interpretation II (“Article 24”) consists of four paragraphs. Continue Reading

金杜助力中信证券完成30亿美元中期票据项目更新及提取借款项目

Posted in Uncategorized

作者:金杜律师事务所 King & Wood Mallesons

2017年4月20日,中信证券股份有限公司(简称“中信证券”)在金杜跨境法律团队的协助下成功更新30亿美元中期票据项目并提取借款。本次发行由中信证券的全资附属公司CITIC Securities Finance MTN Co., Ltd. 作为发行人,由中信证券为其提供担保。

On 20 April 2017, CITIC Securities Co., Ltd. (CITIC Securities), advised by King & Wood Mallesons, successfully updated its $3 billion medium-term notes (MTN) programme and the drawdown thereunder. The notes are issued by CITIC Securities Finance MTN Co., Ltd., a wholly-owned subsidiary of CITIC Securities, and guaranteed by CITIC Securities. Continue Reading

金杜获得2017《亚洲法律杂志》六项中国法律大奖,多领域连年获奖

Posted in Uncategorized

作者:金杜律师事务所

2017年4月20日,在《亚洲法律杂志》(ALB)第14届暨2017年度中国法律大奖颁奖礼上,金杜律师事务所斩获六项大奖,包括:

交易类大奖

  • 年度最佳债券市场交易大奖——世界银行在中国债券市场发展中竖立新的里程碑
  • 年度最佳科技、媒体和电信交易大奖——阿里巴巴以44亿美元战略投资苏宁

Continue Reading

金杜代理涉“阿里斯顿”驰名商标侵权案被江苏高院选为2016年知识产权司法保护十大案例之一

Posted in Uncategorized
作者:金杜律师事务所

江苏省高级人民法院今天发布了2016年江苏法院知识产权司法保护蓝皮书,金杜知识产权诉讼团队代理的涉“阿里斯顿”驰名商标侵权纠纷案以其突出的案件代表性和审判意义,名列2016年度江苏省知识产权保护状况和司法保护十大案例之首。 Continue Reading

专利侵权诉讼,金杜一马当先——埃斯科案入选2016年浙江法院知识产权保护十大典型案件

Posted in Uncategorized

作者:金杜律师事务所

在浙江高院刚刚发布的2016年浙江法院知识产权保护十大典型案件中,知识产权诉讼团队代理的埃斯科公司(简称“埃斯科”)与宁波市路坤国际贸易有限公司侵害发明专利权纠纷案入选。该案的入选理由:在侵害专利权案件中准确界定专利权的保护范围是给予专利权人恰如其分司法保护所面临的首要问题。  Continue Reading

与外方谈和解,你需要知道些什么?

Posted in Dispute Resolution

作者:胡梅 金杜律师事务所争议解决部

utterback_m在中国,争议当事人往往在提起诉讼或仲裁并提交了相应的证据和法律文书之后,才会启动和解谈判。那时,法官或仲裁员可能会给予当事人一个协商和解的机会。有时,和解谈判的启动是当事人向仲裁委秘书或法官建议的产物,当事人会建议和解对案件更为有利。而在绝大多数案件中,中方当事人似乎不愿意过早和解,以免显得其对案件缺乏信心。在美国则恰恰相反。美国的仲裁和诉讼程序十分昂贵,许多公司都希望能够尽早摆脱诉讼程序。即便案件对一方当事人十分有利,如果和解所花费的时间和费用均低于诉讼,当事人仍会考虑进行和解。同样,当事人也都能认识到不管采用何种争议解决方式,其结果都具有不确定性,而和解的结果则是可控的。曾有个说法——“一个不利的和解都会好于一个有利的诉讼”。因此,中方当事人若能与美方对手采用和解谈判的方式解决争议则将更为省时,而美方对手也会希望中方当事人能够对和解谈判的规则有所了解。对于任何习惯于传统诉讼或仲裁-调解结合程序的中方当事人而言,他们可能希望将和解谈判的过程作为证据,或在和解谈判中去形成证据或论点。然而,美国证据规则对于在和解谈判过程中所获得的信息和证据的使用是非常严格的。如果你是美国仲裁、美国法院程序或采用联邦证据规则的美国境外仲裁的当事人,你就必须受限于联邦证据规则第408条“和解与协商”中的规定: Continue Reading

Negotiating a Settlement with a Foreign Party

Posted in Dispute Resolution
By Meg Utterback King & Wood Mallesons’ Dispute Resolution group.

utterback_mIn China, settlement negotiations may not arise until the parties have filed their case in court or arbitration and each side has presented evidence and argument.  At that point, the judge or arbitrator may offer the parties an opportunity to discuss settlement.  Sometimes the introduction of settlement talks is the product of one party or the other suggesting to the arbitration institution secretary or the judge that settlement is a good option for the case.  In most cases, Chinese parties seem to be reluctant to settle early lest it show a fear that the party lacks confidence in the strength of its case.

American counterparties are different.  US arbitration and litigation proceedings are expensive propositions and many companies seek to dispense with litigation early if at all possible.  Settlement is considered even where one may have a relatively strong case if the cost of settlement may be less than the costs of litigation time and fees.  Also, parties recognize the uncertainty of dispute resolution in any forum and so settlement allows certainty.  Thus, we hear the expression, “A bad settlement is better than a good trial.”

As a result, a Chinese party may end up i Continue Reading