On December 24, 2025, China’s Ministry of Justice (MOJ) and National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) released the Guiding Opinions on Strengthening Arbitration Work in Intellectual Property Disputes (关于加强知识产权纠纷仲裁工作的指导意见). The Guiding Opinions are encouraging Chinese arbitration institutions to handle international arbitration cases. A translation follows. The original text is available here (Chinese only).
In order to implement the decisions and plans of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on strengthening intellectual property protection, enhance the arbitration of intellectual property disputes, and give full play to the important role of arbitration in the protection of the entire intellectual property chain, the following guiding opinions are put forward.
I. Strengthen the Development of Specialized Arbitration Institutions. Support qualified arbitration institutions in establishing internal departments such as intellectual property arbitration courts (centers), creating a roster of intellectual property arbitrators, concentrating service resources, and providing professional arbitration services. Select 20 arbitration institutions nationwide to strengthen their intellectual property arbitration service capabilities and establish a national list of recommended intellectual property arbitration institutions. Support arbitration institutions in selecting qualified professionals from among trademark and patent examiners, pre-examiners, intellectual property lawyers, patent agents, engineers, and intellectual property teaching and research personnel to serve as arbitrators. Improve the selection and training mechanism for intellectual property arbitration secretaries. Establish an intellectual property arbitration expert database.
II. Improve Specialized Arbitration Rules. Arbitration institutions should establish specialized rules for intellectual property arbitration, taking into account the characteristics and realities of intellectual property disputes. Efforts should be made to promote collaboration between national-level intellectual property protection centers and rapid rights protection centers and arbitration institutions to provide support such as consultation, case filing assistance, and pre-trial mediation for intellectual property arbitration. The participation of technical investigators in arbitration proceedings should be explored to provide consultation and issue technical investigation opinions for ascertaining the technical facts of arbitration cases. Support should be given to relevant industry associations to include intellectual property arbitration clauses in their articles of association, encouraging member companies of these associations to submit intellectual property disputes to arbitration for resolution.
III. Expanding the Scope of Arbitration. Support arbitration institutions in establishing and improving collaborative mechanisms with intellectual property management departments and relevant business associations to promote the use of arbitration to resolve intellectual property contract disputes and other property rights disputes in accordance with the law. Broaden the scope of intellectual property arbitration and explore the introduction of arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism in disputes such as patent open licensing and standard essential patent licensing fees. In conjunction with important time nodes such as “National Intellectual Property Publicity Week,” “Constitution Publicity Week,” and “Civil Code Publicity Month,” implement the responsibility of “whoever enforces the law is responsible for popularizing it,” organize special publicity campaigns on intellectual property arbitration, and improve public awareness of intellectual property arbitration.
IV. Advance International Intellectual Property Arbitration. Arbitration institutions are encouraged to actively participate in international intellectual property dispute resolution, engage in exchanges and cooperation with international intellectual property organizations, and enhance their influence and competitiveness. Support will be provided for arbitration institutions to establish liaison mechanisms with overseas intellectual property dispute response guidance centers and guide enterprises to choose Chinese arbitration institutions to handle international intellectual property disputes. Working mechanisms will be improved, and support will be given to the World Intellectual Property Organization Arbitration and Mediation Shanghai Center to play an active role, increasing publicity for Chinese intellectual property arbitration.
V. Strengthen Work Support. Intellectual property management departments and judicial administrative organs should establish a consultation mechanism to promptly study key issues in intellectual property dispute arbitration, promote the organic integration of intellectual property dispute arbitration with administrative adjudication, administrative confirmation of rights, notarization, and mediation, and facilitate the professional and efficient resolution of disputes. Several high-level intellectual property arbitration basic research platforms should be established in suitable regions to conduct specialized research based on the needs of key intellectual property work. Research on the applicability of arbitration in new economic and new business models such as the digital economy and platform economy should be intensified. Various forms of intellectual property arbitration training should be conducted at different levels and categories to enhance the ability to resolve disputes using arbitration. A mechanism for publishing typical intellectual property arbitration cases should be established to regularly collect and publish beneficial practices and experiences in intellectual property dispute arbitration work from various regions.
