China’s Supreme People’s Court on March 31 released a second list of exemplary cases, including 2 criminal cases and 8 civil cases. The 10 cases are meant to follow up the first list of 10 exemplary cases released by the top court on September 7, 2021.

The fourth Amendments to the Seed Law of the People’s Republic of China (《中华人民共和国种子法》) on March 1 came into force. The highlight of the amended law is the introduction of the provisions about the essentially derived variety (EDV), which have been established in international laws since the 1990s. The purpose of having EDV provisions is to ensure that the breeders of successful and innovative plant varieties are acknowledged and fairly compensated when another breeder only makes minor changes to that variety. The breeder of an EDV variety can seek the protection of that variety without securing permission from the breeder of the initial variety. However, if a breeder of an EDV wishes to commercialize and sell that variety, it must reach an agreement with the breeder of the initial variety.

The 10 cases are as follows.

Case 1

Case docket no.: （2021）豫14刑终285号

Case docket no. English transliteration: 285, second instance (终), criminal case (刑), (2021) Shangqiu Intermediate People’s Court of Henan province (（2021）豫14)

Lower court case docket no.: （2021）豫1481刑初28号

Lower court case docket no. English transliteration: 28, first instance (初), criminal case (刑), (2021) Yongcheng Intermediate People’s Court of Henan province (（2021）豫1481)

Case summary:

Lu purchased low-quality pea seeds to resell as counterfeits of products under the brand name “Zhong Wan Jiu Hao (中豌九号).” Zhao, as the buyer of the counterfeit seeds, intentionally resold them to another buyer Li. Li followed suit. The fake seeds caused 140,000 yuan of economic losses to five farmers as their end users. Lu, Zhao, and Li had gained 4,050 yuan, 11,840 yuan, and 9,890 yuan respectively from the sales of the counterfeit seeds. The court confiscated all the illegal gains and sentenced the three defendants to 2.5 years, 2 years and 10 months, and 2 years and 10 months in prison and fines of 20,000 yuan, 30,000 yuan, and 30,000 yuan, respectively. The defendants appealed the case and the appellate court upheld the lower court ruling.

Case 2

Case docket no.: （2019）皖1622刑初141号

Case docket no. English transliteration: 141, first instance (初), criminal case (刑), (2019) Mengcheng County People’s Court of Anhui province (（2019）皖1622)

Case summary:

Lu purchased uncertified soybean seeds to resell as counterfeits of products under the brand name “Nong Yan Yi Hao (农研一号).” Xue, as the buyer of the counterfeit seeds, intentionally resold them. The fake seeds caused 55,436 yuan of economic losses to some farmers as their end users. Lu and Xue took the initiative to pay 279,000 yuan and 83,020 yuan in damages respectively to some of the injured farmers and were condoned and forgiven by them. In view of their remedying acts, the court mitigated the punishment by sentencing the two defendants to 10 months and 6 months in prison and fines of 100,000 yuan and 30,000 yuan, respectively.

Case 3

Case docket no.: （2021）苏01民初850号

Case docket no. English transliteration: 850, first instance (初), civil case (民), (2021) Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court of Jiangsu province (（2021）苏01)

Case summary:

Jiangsu Jindafeng Agricultural Technology Co., Ltd. (江苏金大丰农业科技有限公司) produced and distributed rice seeds as counterfeits of products under the brand name “Nan Jing Jiu Yi Ling Ba (南粳9108).” Jiangsu Gaoke Seed Technology Co., Ltd. (江苏省高科种业科技有限公司) sued Jindafeng for infringing its rights to the new plant variety, seeking 3 million yuan in damages. The court found that the defendant gained 393,684 yuan from the sales of the counterfeits. Affirming that the infringed variety was well received on the market, the court agreed with the plaintiff’s arguments and awarded it the amount required.

Case 4

Case docket no.: （2021）最高法知民终466号

Case docket no. English transliteration: 466, second instance (终), civil case (民), intellectual property (知), (2021) Supreme People’s Court (（2021）最高法)

Lower court case docket no.: （2020）皖01民初1503号

Lower court case docket no. English transliteration: 1503, first instance (初), civil case (民), (2020) Hefei Intermediate People’s Court of Anhui province (（2020）皖01)

Case summary:

Shenzhen Jingu Meixiang Industrial Co., Ltd. (深圳市金谷美香实业有限公司) was the breeder of a new rice variety “Huang Hua Zhan (黄华占).” Huoqiu Baofeng Seed Co., Ltd. (霍邱县保丰种业有限责任公司) sold rice seeds of the variety produced by Hefei Wanfeng Seed Co., Ltd. (合肥皖丰种子有限责任公司) without the breeder’s authorization. In light of two former similar cases, Jingu Meixiang agreed not to sue Wanfeng by reaching a settlement with it specifying that Wanfeng pay 1 million yuan in damages in case of further infringement. Jingu Meixiang sued Baofeng and Wanfeng for infringing its rights to the new plant variety, seeking 1 million yuan in damages and 50,000 yuan in reasonable expenses. The trial court ordered Wanfeng to pay 300,000 yuan and Baofeng to pay 50,000 yuan in damages to the plaintiff. Both parties appealed the case and the Supreme People’s Court increased the award from Wanfeng to the amount required by the plaintiff, holding it had been agreed upon in the previous settlement reached by Wanfeng and Jingu Meixiang.

Case 5

Case docket no.: （2021）最高法知民终1469号

Case docket no. English transliteration: 1469, second instance (终), civil case (民), intellectual property (知), (2021) Supreme People’s Court (（2021）最高法)

Lower court case docket no.: （2021）鲁02知民初23号

Lower court case docket no. English transliteration: 23, first instance (初), criminal case (民), intellectual property (知), (2021) Qingdao Intermediate People’s Court of Shandong province (（2021）鲁02)

Case summary:

Jiuquan Huamei Seeds Co., Ltd. (酒泉市华美种子有限责任公司) was the breeder of a new pepper variety “Hua Mei Yi Ling Wu (华美105).” Xia sold pepper seeds counterfeiting the brand-name seeds. Huamei sued Xia for infringing its rights to the new plant variety. The trial court found against the plaintiff holding that it didn’t produce clear and convincing evidence to prove that the defendant had produced the allegedly infringing seeds. The plaintiff appealed the case and the Supreme People’s Court ruled the defendant to pay 450,000 yuan as the license fee, 450,000 yuan in damages, and 150,000 in reasonable expenses.

Case 6

Case docket no.: （2021）最高法知民终884号

Case docket no. English transliteration: 884, second instance (终), civil case (民), intellectual property (知), (2021) Supreme People’s Court (（2021）最高法)

Lower court case docket no.: （2019）苏01民初2143号

Lower court case docket no. English transliteration: 2143, first instance (初), criminal case (民), (2021) Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court of Jiangsu province (（2019）苏01)

Case summary:

Jiangsu Gold Earth Seed Co., Ltd. (江苏金土地种业有限公司) was the breeder of a new wheat variety “Yang Fu Mai Si Hao (扬辐麦4号)”. Yangzhou Jinri Seed Co., Ltd. (扬州今日种业有限公司) sold wheat seeds counterfeiting the brand-name seeds. Huamei sued Xia for infringing its rights to the new plant variety. The trial court ordered the defendant to pay 200,000 yuan in damages to the plaintiff. The defendant appealed the case and the Supreme People’s Court upheld the lower court ruling.

Case 7

Case docket no.: （2021）最高法知民终451号

Case docket no. English transliteration: 451, second instance (终), civil case (民), intellectual property (知), (2021) Supreme People’s Court (（2021）最高法)

Lower court case docket no.: （2020）豫01知民初982号

Lower court case docket no. English transliteration: 982, first instance (初), criminal case (民), intellectual property (知), (2021) Zhengzhou Intermediate People’s Court of Henan province (（2020）豫01)

Case summary:

Beijing Beifang Fengda Seeds Co., Ltd. (北京北方丰达种业有限责任公司) was the breeder of a new pear variety “Su Cui Yi Hao (苏翠1号)”. Weidong Pingding Planting Cooperative (卫东区平鼎种植专业合作社) planted and sold pear seeds counterfeiting the brand-name seeds. Fengda sued Pingding for infringing its rights to the new plant variety. The trial court ordered the defendant to pay 80,000 yuan in damages to the plaintiff. Both parties appealed the case and the Supreme People’s Court increased the award from the defendant to 300,000 yuan in damages and 10,000 yuan in reasonable expenses.

Case 8

Case docket no.: （2021）最高法知民终1661号

Case docket no. English transliteration: 1661, second instance (终), civil case (民), intellectual property (知), (2021) Supreme People’s Court (（2021）最高法)

Lower court case docket no.: （2021）豫01知民初497号

Lower court case docket no. English transliteration: 497, first instance (初), criminal case (民), intellectual property (知), (2021) Zhengzhou Intermediate People’s Court of Henan province (（2021）豫01)

Case summary:

Jinyuan Bangdafu Agricultural Technology Co., Ltd. (金苑邦达富农业科技有限公司) was the breeder of a new wheat variety “Wei Long Yi Liu Jiu (伟隆169).” Fengzhiyuan Agricultural Technology Co., Ltd. (丰之源农业科技有限公司) produced and distributed a derivative variety of “Wei Long Yi Liu Jiu” without the breeder’s authorization. Moling Spring Flower Farming Product Store (秣陵镇春花农资店) distributed a derivative variety of “Wei Long Yi Liu Jiu” without the breeder’s authorization as well. Jinyuan sued Fengzhiyuan and Spring Flower for infringing its rights to the new plant variety. The trial court ordered the defendants to pay 100,000 yuan in damages and 5,000 yuan in damages respectively to the plaintiff. The defendants appealed the case and the Supreme People’s Court upheld the lower court ruling.

Case 9

Case docket no.: （2019）鲁01民初1210号

Case docket no. English transliteration: 1210, first instance (初), civil case (民), (2019) Jinan Intermediate People’s Court of Henan province (（2019）鲁01)

Case summary:

Shouguang Deruite Seed Co., Ltd. (寿光德瑞特种业有限公司) was the breeder of a new cucumber variety “De Rui Te Qi Jiu (德瑞特79).” Shandong Bosheng Seed Co., Ltd. (山东博盛种业有限公司) produced and distributed a cucumber variety “Bo Sheng Jiu Jiu (博盛99).” Deruite sued Bosheng for infringing its rights to the new plant variety after finding that Bo Sheng Jiu Jiu was exactly the same as De Rui Te Qi Jiu. The court ordered the defendant to pay 392,000 yuan in damages to the plaintiff.

Case 10

Case docket no.: （2021）琼 73 知民初1号

Case docket no. English transliteration: 1, first instance (初), civil case (民), intellectual property (知), (2021) Hainan Free Trade Port Intellectual Property Court (（2021）琼 73)

Case summary:

Hunan Yahua Seed Science Institute (湖南亚华种业科学研究院) was the breeder of a new rice variety “Long Ke Liu San Ba S (隆科638S).” Zhang produced and distributed a rice variety Yahua found to be the derivative variety of Long Ke Liu San Ba S. Yahua sued Zhang for infringing its rights to the new plant variety, seeking 500,000 yuan in damages. The court ordered the defendant to pay monetary damages to the plaintiff.

中文新闻线索：

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/eALFqKBjGK2yrvRgryc3XQ

https://www.caas.cn/xwzx/mtbd/314275.html

https://rouse.com/insights/news/2022/china-s-new-seed-law-with-ip-protection-over-plant-variety