[1]祁雯雯.论商标宣告无效的司法审查——兼评《最高人民法院关于审理商标授权确权行政案件若干问题的规定》第28,30条[J].镇江高专学报,2018,31(01):60-63.
 QI Wenwen.Judicial review of trademark invalidation— Comments on Article 28, 30 of The Rules on the Administrative Trials regarding Trademark Approval and Validity of the P.R.C Supreme Peoples Court[J].,2018,31(01):60-63.
点击复制

论商标宣告无效的司法审查——兼评《最高人民法院关于审理商标授权确权行政案件若干问题的规定》第28,30条
()
分享到:

《镇江高专学报》[ISSN:/CN:]

卷:
31
期数:
2018年01期
页码:
60-63
栏目:
政治与法律论坛
出版日期:
2018-03-05

文章信息/Info

Title:
Judicial review of trademark invalidation— Comments on Article 28, 30 of The Rules on the Administrative Trials regarding
Trademark Approval and Validity of the P.R.C Supreme Peoples Court
文章编号:
1008-8148(2018)01-0060-04
作者:
祁雯雯
中央财经大学 法学院,北京100081
Author(s):
QI Wenwen
School of Law, Central University of the Finance and Economics, Beijing 100081, China
关键词:
司法审查行政诉讼不予受理有限司法变更权
Keywords:
judicial review administrative litigation refusal of accept limited judicial change right
分类号:
D923.43
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
2013年《中华人民共和国商标法》明确规定了商标宣告无效程序,并保留了当事人对商标宣告无效决定(裁定)的司法审查权。在认定商标宣告无效的司法审查应属“行政诉讼”的基础上,针对行政诉讼引发的循环诉讼、无法实质解决纠纷的现实问题,《最高人民法院关于审理商标授权确权行政案件若干问题的规定》立足于商标宣告无效司法审查的特殊性,准许法院在特定情形下不予受理,但并未赋予法院有限的司法变更权,应坚持《最高人民法院关于审理商标授权确权行政案件若干问题的规定(征求意见稿)》,赋予法院有限司法变更权。
Abstract:
 In 2013, the Trademark Law stipulated “declaring nullity to registered trademarks”, and gave the party the right of judicial review. On the basis of the “administrative litigation”, the administrative litigation can lead to circling litigation, but can’t solve the real problem of the dispute. Based on the special nature of the judicial review of the trademark declaration, the Administrative Trials regarding Trademark Approval and Validity of the P.R.C Supreme Peoples Court allows the court to be inadmissible under certain circumstances, but does not give the court a limited right of judicial change.The Administrative Trials regarding Trademark Approval and Validity of the P.R.C Supreme Peoples Court (Draft for Seeking Public Opinions) has given the court limited judicial changes.
 

参考文献/References:

[1] 周泰山.商标注册无效制度[J].中华商标,2006(7):43-45.
[2] 李新生,强刚华,刘井玉.对中外专利商标司法救济模式的调查分析与比较研究(下篇)[J].行政法学研究,2004(2):85-86.
[3] 宋炉安.司法最终权: 行政诉讼引发的思考[J].行政法学研究,1999(4):49-51.
[4] 何渊,凌宗亮.商标确权行政纠纷实质性解决的裁判路径[J].知识产权法研究,2014(12):74-75.
[5] 周云川,迟晓燕.商标确权行政纠纷中“循环诉讼”问题的解决思路(二)[N].中国知识产权报,2007-12-14(7).
[6] 李柏林.行政诉讼中司法变更权的完善[J].法学,1994(11):9-11.
[7] 杜颖.《最高人民法院关于审理商标授权确权行政案件若干问题的规定(征求意见稿)》评析[J].知识产权,2015(1):28-30.

相似文献/References:

[1]戴中璧.论行政规范在行政诉讼中的地位[J].镇江高专学报,2006,(03):86.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1008-8148.2006.03.024]
 DAI Zhong-bi.On the status of administrative norms in administrative lawsuit[J].,2006,(01):86.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1008-8148.2006.03.024]

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
收稿日期: 2017-08-25
作者简介: 祁雯雯(1994—),女,山西临汾人,硕士生,主要从事民商法研究。
更新日期/Last Update: 2018-03-14