Abstract: This case was rated as the "Best Case of Intellectual Property Protection in 2014-2015" by the High Quality Brand Protection Committee of the Ministry of Commerce
After investigation, the client of Lingyun Yongran found that a certain network technology company in Shanghai (the "defendant") had used its copyrighted software without authorization. Therefore, they entrusted the legal team of Lingyun Yongran Law Firm in Shanghai ("Lingyun Yongran") to handle the relevant matters. After unsuccessful negotiation and settlement, the legal team representing the client will be informed to the court.
The lawyer team of Lingyun Yongran filed a lawsuit in Xuhui District People's Court based on the defendant's registered address information; However, after filing the case, the defendant raised an objection to jurisdiction on the grounds that he had previously relocated to Pudong New Area for office work, stating that he had lived continuously in Pudong New Area for more than a year and should take that area as his place of residence, and the Xuhui District People's Court had no jurisdiction. If the court supports its claim, the submitted evidence will need to be transferred to a new court and handled by a new judge. During this period, there will undoubtedly be a significant increase in the litigation costs of this case, and the corresponding risks of evidence damage, loss, concealment, and transfer will also greatly increase.
This case has been filed, and according to the principle of filing jurisdiction, the court has obtained jurisdiction and established jurisdiction to respond to the lawsuit. From this perspective, the legal team led by Ling Yun Yongran explained their agency viewpoint to the court; At the same time, combining the viewpoint of "saving judicial resources and reducing the cost of parties' rights protection", it is explained that transferring jurisdiction will cause a waste of judicial resources and unnecessary obstacles to customers' rights protection. The final court adopted the viewpoint of the legal team and ruled to dismiss the defendant's jurisdictional objection.
After the first instance ruling, the defendant appealed. The lawyer team of Ling Yun Yongran once again gained the support of the court in the second instance with detailed and thorough reasoning. The second instance court ruled to uphold the decision, and the lawyer team once again obtained beneficial results for the client.
This case was rated as the "2014-2015 Best Case of Intellectual Property Protection" by the Quality Brand Protection Committee of the Ministry of Commerce. This case provides a solution to the problem of "how to determine jurisdiction when there is a conflict between the registered place and the actual place of operation", emphasizing the viewpoint that the effectiveness of the public announcement of the registered place cannot be denied when operating in a different location, and has high guiding significance for similar cases. Meanwhile, the outcome of this case exceeded the client's expectations, and the client subsequently entrusted the legal team of Ling Yun Yongran to handle a large number of legal matters.
