By Susan Ning, Ding Liang and Jiang Liyong, King & Wood’s Competition Practice
In mid-August, it was reported in the press(1) that the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) had received complaints that the commercial banks in China have engaged in price-fixing conduct. Pursuant to the Anti-Monopoly Law, conduct amounting to price-fixing is prohibited.
By Li Jinnan, Partner, King & Wood’s Banking & Finance Group
In order to support outbound investment projects of domestic PRC entities, to meet the policy demands of domestic credit support, and to further facilitate trading and investing, the State Administration of Foreign Exchange ("SAFE") on July 30th, 2010 promulgated the Notice on the Administration of Overseas Security by Domestic Entities (the "Notice"), which came into effect as of the date of promulgation. This Notice relaxes the restrictions on financing of outbound projects.
Continue Reading New SAFE Regulations Support Financing of Outbound Deals
By Susan Ning, Shan Lining and Liu Jia, King & Wood’s Competition Practice
On 13 August 2010, the proposed acquisition of Alcon, Inc (Alcon) by Novartis AG (Novartis) was approved by the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM), with conditions. MOFCOM’s public announcement in relation to this acquisition is located here. This is the 6th merger that has been approved with conditions, since the enactment of the Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) in 2008.(1)
Continue Reading Novartis’ Acquisition of Alcon – Cleared with Conditions
By Susan Ning, Shan Lining and Angie Ng, King & Wood’s Competition Practice
On 12 August 2010, the PRC Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) hosted a “stocktake” briefing to mark the second anniversary of the Anti-Monopoly Law (AML).(1) Director-General of the Anti-Monopoly Bureau Shang Ming chaired the briefing. MOFCOM’s transcript of this briefing is located here. The following were the salient points raised during the briefing.
Continue Reading Second Anniversary of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law – MOFCOM’s Stocktake
By Meng Xianghai, King & Wood’s IP Department
Recently, an increasing number of opinions from the State Intellectual Property Office ("SIPO") indicate that applications for patent protection for some inventions do not fall under the scope provided in Paragraph 2 of Article 2 of the PRC Patent Law, which defines an "’invention’ as any new technical solution relating to a product, a process, or improvement thereof." Thus, to understand what inventions can be patented, numerous terms such as “technical solution” must be properly defined.
By Shi Yusheng and Xia Fan, King & Wood’s IP Litigation Department
The newly promulgated Tort Law of the People’s Republic of China came into force on July 1, 2010. The Tort Law, positions itself as a fundamental doctrine in the protection of one’s civil and property rights in China. Intellectual property rights, such as copyrights, patent rights, trademark rights, are included in the scope of protection under the Tort Law. Accordingly, relevant provisions of the Tort Law will have substantial impact on IPR infringement. While there are many intersects, one major impact is discussed below.
By Mark Schaub, Partner, Corporate, King & Wood Shanghai
Most companies engaging in a China project will likely need support from external consultants. This final section highlights the remaining members of the China deal team, including translators, accountants, and outside counsel.
Continue Reading China M&A: Assembling an Effective Team for a China Transaction Part III
By Mark Schaub, Partner, Corporate, King & Wood Shanghai
Most companies engaging in a China project will likely need support from external consultants. However, selecting the external team is often more difficult than assembling the internal team — who do you need? How do you find good ones? And what role should they play? This portion highlights the infamous China consultant. What kind of role do they play and do you actually need them?
Continue Reading China M&A: Assembling an Effective Team for a China Transaction Part II
By Kenneth Choy, Partner, King & Wood – Hong Kong
The United States Supreme Court finally issued its decision on Bilski v. Kappos just before it shut down for the summer. As widely expected, the justices unanimously agreed that the Bilski claims are abstract ideas which are nonpatentable and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit properly rejected the claims. However, the court’s decision, authored by Justice Anthony Kennedy, left many dissatisfied as it declined to clarify limitations on the patentability of business method claims. The high court simply rejected the Federal Circuit’s view that the machine-or-transformation test was the exclusive test for patentable process claims and instead, looked back to the last century, to its cases of Gottschalk v. Benson, (1972), Parker v. Flook, (1978) and Diamond v. Diehr, (1981) to find the “guideposts” and §100(b) the Patent Act for the definition of “process”.
Continue Reading Bringing the U.S. patent regime closer to China’s? Bilski v. Kappos
By Mark Schaub, Partner, Corporate, King & Wood Shanghai
Many West European and US companies have thinned out their ranks of middle management in the never-ending pursuit of shareholder value. A China project is likely to be more time intensive and involved (and therefore expensive) than the foreign company initially forecasts. For this reason many foreign investors in China face difficulties in assembling a successful business project team to implement the project. Part I discusses the assembling of an effective in-house team.
Continue Reading China M&A: Assembling an Effective Team for a China Transaction Part I