Home >

Legal Battle Between New Belle Shoe Industry And Houjie Shoe City Continues To Ferment

2013/11/13 10:50:00 37

< new a > target= > _blank "href=" //www.sjfzxm.com/ > > shoes /a > industry (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd. and Dongguan Houjie shoe city and merchants litigation litigation continues to ferment.

Yesterday, the Municipal Intermediate People's court held a public hearing in which 37 cases of second instance were heard, and the trial focused on eight controversial points such as legality of the notarization in a series of cases. After a morning's trial, the court pronounced 2 cases in court, dismissed the appeal request of the new Belle shoe industry, and the other cases were still under mediation.

generally speaking, one side thinks that Houjie shoe city merchants sell fake infringement, while shoe city "mismanagement" and "help sell fake" constitute a joint infringement. The other side believes that new belle is using the right to protect the rights, and the lawyers jointly "fishing" profits, and the validity of the carpet rights protection method is doubtful.

it is understood that both sides' "grudge" has been going on for several years, and the parties have lost and won.

City Court revealed that at present, Dongguan has handled more than 170 cases of new Bai Li, involving 118 of Hongyun shoe city.

[scene] merchants pointed out that notarized shoes had passed through /p >

the new Belle series refers to the discovery of counterfeit shoes sold by Dongguan merchants in the wholesale and retail way of the brand brand of the new Belle footwear industry, especially in the shoe city of Houjie ha ha area, which is heavily documented and prosecuted by many merchants.

At the same time, Dongguan Xiong Shun Industrial Co., Ltd. (Xiong Xin company), the founder of Hongyun shoe city, is also accused of "mismanagement" and "help selling fake". It requires the court to confirm its infringement.

yesterday morning, a total of 37 cases were heard, including the plaintiffs of the original plaintiff, the new Belle shoe industry, some of them were the original defendants, namely, the merchant management side, the company appeals or the original trial defendants, some small businesses such as Tang Mouchun, and others appealed.

the court summed up the legality of legalization in series of cases and so on. The 8 focuses were on the proof.

Merchants and shoe makers have enumerated the legality of whether the notarization is true or legitimate.

merchant Li Mouyong said that in his case, the receipts in the notaries submitted by the other side did not match the sales shoes, and the receipts did not contain official seals.

"P", and businessman Chen also said that in his case, the time of notarization was different from the time on which the receipt was written.

"The receipt is in 2010. The notarization date is 2011. How can I sell the shoes I sold a year ago? You passed a year to be notarized."

for this reason, the new Belle company said that notarization notarization is objective fact, and the other party can not overturn the content and legality of notarial certificate.

then, another woman businessman said that after she received the notarial certificate, the photos from the photos showed that the shoes that had been notarized by the other side had been trails.

In this regard, the judge immediately asked the court to produce notarized sealed shoes, both sides on-site inspection.

Reporters saw that two pairs of shoes had been worn down.

Merchants asked, "we bought all new shoes. Why are these shoes worn out here?"

for this reason, the new attorney company confirmed that two pairs of a href= "//www.sjfzxm.com/news/index_s.asp" > shoes < /a > were old, but they were not sure whether anyone had crossed.

then, the presiding judge interprets the law in court: whether the notarization is lawful and the content is true. The notarial document does not belong to the fact of exemption (that is, the fact that the parties do not need to bear the burden of proof), but it is a high proof of evidence. If there is evidence to prove the defect, the court can not accept it.

[judgement] /strong > /p >

< < > > < < > > < < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > > < > >

after the trial, the Chief Justice announced the adjournment of the collegial panel.

After fifteen minutes, the members of the collegial panel returned to the court and sentenced two cases to the court on the spot.

the first instance of these two cases confirmed that the merchants had infringements, and the merchants compensation 4000 yuan, but as a shoe city party, it did not constitute a tort.

Regarding this, the new Belle shoe industry refused to accept the appeal to the city intermediate people's court, insisting that shoe city knew that there were infringements in the shops, but did not take any effective measures to stop the infringement, and asked shoe city to share the responsibility.

Moreover, the compensation amount of merchants in the first instance is too small.

the city intermediate people's court believes that the new Belle shoe industry at that time believed that shoe city helped infringement and sent a letter to shoe city, but shoe city believed that the letter from the other side was only a warning. It was not the identification of industry and commerce or related departments. It could not be confirmed that the shoes sold by the merchants were genuine or fake, and there was no right and qualification to stop them. Therefore, the shoe city was found to be inadequate in helping infringement evidence, thus rejecting the appeal request of the new Belle shoe industry.

during the court hearing, the merchants said that the phenomenon of selling fake goods in shoes city did exist. They did not go to the industrial and commercial law enforcement authorities to investigate and prosecute, but they were prosecuted on a large scale by collecting evidence with lawyers, and the way of protecting their rights was excessive.

judge's statement

intellectual property rights "moderately legal" /p >

Cheng Chunhua, President of the three Court (intellectual property division) of the Central People's Court of China (P), said that for intellectual property cases, it is necessary to adhere to the "strengthening protection, categorization, strictness and moderation", which is referred to as "judicial policy" in accordance with the law.

Now it is a society under the rule of law. We must crack down on violations of intellectual property rights.

At the same time, while the State encourages innovation, it is necessary to safeguard the rights and interests of the patent or brand rights holders. P

Dongguan is currently undergoing industrial pformation and upgrading, and it is particularly important to establish an innovative and strong economy.

meanwhile, the court will treat the carpet lawsuits lawfully and lawfully.

For the rights protection enterprises, if their trademarks and other intellectual property rights are infringed by others, enterprises should have evidence to support and compensate the other party. They should be lawful and reasonable. They should be required according to the loss of the enterprise or the profits of the other party. We should consider the current situation of the operation of the non malicious infringement merchants, not be able to ask for a price over the sky, and pay more attention to attacking the producers of the infringers and wholesalers who sell maliciously.

, therefore, in determining the amount of compensation, the court will seriously distinguish the malicious maliciously "a href=" //www.sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp "> producer" /a ", wholesalers and non malicious retailers, the court will increase the intensity of the attack on malicious infringers, but should understand the actual difficulties and profit situation of the non malicious retail small businesses, it can not be killed by a single case.