Research On Technical Advisor System In Intellectual Property Litigation

Intellectual property litigation is the most primary way to resolve intellectual property disputes because of the regularity of its progress and the authority of the referee results.The intellectual property cases are more professional and difficult than ordinary civil cases.Experts in various industries can participate in intellectual property litigation to help improve the professional trial level of the case.The technical advisor system is one of them.It has great theoretical and practical value to research intellectual property litigation technical advisor system and to improve the quality of intellectual property cases.This paper takes a title of “Research on Technical Advisor System in Intellectual Property Litigation”,summarizes and analyzes the current status and existing problems of the system based on the definition of the technical advisor system,then put forward feasible conception to improve the system after observes the similar systems of the United States and Japan from comparative law.Full text is divided into four sections except for introduction and epilogue,with thirty thousand words in total.The first section is the definition of the technical advisor system.Technical advisor is one of the systems introduced by Chinese courts to solve the problem of intellectual property cases.It refers to the fact that when the people's court hears intellectual property cases,the judges consult with technical advisor in relevant fields on the specific issues involved in the case.The technical advisor system,which is supported by a well-trained expert as a judge,has unique value compared with the technical investigators and expert jurors.On the one hand,it can guarantee the realization of litigation value such as fairness and efficiency,on the other hand,it refers to the referee.The improvement of quality is in line with the country's intellectual property strategy choice.The second section concludes the present situation and deficiency of technical advisor system.Courts at all levels in China have formulated different levels of normative documents for technical advisor.Judicial practice has taken different actions.For example,most courts do not disclose the process of technical advisor and there are public.The opinions expressed by advisors are also used as reference opinions and those who have been identified as evidence.From the legislative and judicial status of the technical advisor system,it can be found that there are many problems.The lack of a unified legal norm system,the chaos of the current procedures and technical advisor,and these problems are urgently to be resolved.The third section observes the technical advisor system of intellectual property litigation in the United States and Japan from comparative law.In the common law system of the United States,there is a precedent in the use of the technical advisor system by the courts.The judges select a professional through open and fair procedures,and explain technical terms to the judges.They do not accept the questioning and cross-examination of the parties.In addition,the special mater system in statutory law has also been applied.In the intellectual property litigation in Japan,technical advisor system was introduced to compensate for the inadequacy of the technical investigators.After listening to the opinions of the parties,the technical advisors will explain the judges based on their professional knowledge.In the process of explanation,the parties may present their opinions.Intellectual property litigation expert advisor system of the U.S and Japan tends to be open to the public and the parties involved,which has important implications for the improvement of China's technical advisor system.The last section reveals the routes for consummate technical advisor system in intellectual property litigation,the institutional orientation of technical advisor and the qualitative nature of advisory opinions should be clarified.As an advisor of the judge,the technical advisor can only consult on the specific factual issues.The advisory opinion is determined to be more in line with law and trial.Standardize procedures of the technical advisor system,firstly is to determine the selection criteria and the prohibition conditions for the technical advisor system;secondly,the technical advisor activities are reconstructed based on the procedure disclosure and expansion of the participation of the parties,including allowing the parties to apply.Initiate technical advisor and publicize the technical advisor process;in the end,it should make arrangements for the rights and obligations of the technical advisor,such as their salary withdrawal,avoidance reasons and withdrawal mechanism.Meanwhile the Supreme People's Court unifies the legal norm system in the form of judicial interpretation to achieve an organic connection with expert jurors,technical investigators and other systems.