On January 28, 2026, the Intellectual Property Court (IPC) of China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) released the 2025 Annual Report of the Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme People’s Court (最高人民法院知识产权法庭年度报告). The Reported highlighted some IP infringement cases as well as provided statistics on caseloads and verdicts. Punitive damages are being awarded more regularly, but large verdicts are still relatively rare. In 2025, 30 cases (a 66.7% increase year-on-year) applied punitive damages, with a total compensation amount of 1.13 billion RMB (a 29.4% increase year-on-year), averaging approximately 38 million RMB per case; 32 cases received high compensation exceeding 10 million RMB, with a total compensation amount of 2.54 billion yuan, averaging approximately 80 million yuan per case. 
The IPC Report highlighted three cases with high verdicts:
In a trade secret infringement case involving “glass machine” technology, the court severely punished trade secret infringement in the high-end equipment manufacturing field, awarding punitive damages of over 380 million RMB (three times the actual damages). In a patent infringement case involving “electronic-grade copper oxide,” the court set a record for the highest compensation awarded to an individual patent holder, exceeding 120 million RMB, and clarified that the destruction of equipment can be achieved through dismantling, modification, etc., effectively protecting the rights of the right holder while avoiding resource waste.
…
In the “NP01154” corn new variety infringement case, punitive damages of over 53 million RMB were awarded, setting a new record for plant variety infringement cases in my country and sending a strong signal of strict protection of breeding technology innovation.
The IPC also highlighted other punitive damages cases but did not list the compensation awarded:
The function of the punitive damages system is fully utilized. Serious intellectual property infringement acts are severely punished according to law, effectively deterring infringement. The application of punitive damages is increased. In addition to the aforementioned “Glass Machine” trade secret infringement case, the “NP01154” corn new variety infringement case, and other cases where high punitive damages were awarded, in the “Comprehensive Protection Network” patent infringement case, a 1x punitive damage was applied to infringers who committed multiple infringements over a long period and refused to admit to manufacturing infringing products; in the “Mobile Game” software copyright infringement and unfair competition case, a 2x punitive damage was applied based on the infringer’s dishonest conduct in business and repeated disregard of the court’s order to provide the source code of the infringing software; in the “Infrared Thermal Imager” software copyright infringement case, a 3x punitive damage was applied considering the concealment of the infringement and the possibility of the infringer evading legal responsibility; in the “Luggage Intermediate Panel” patent infringement case, a 4x punitive damage was applied to infringers who changed their legal entity after being held liable for infringement and organized multiple entities to continue committing essentially the same infringing acts.
Regarding trade secrets, the Report stated:
The court significantly strengthened judicial protection of trade secrets. Since its establishment, the court has accepted 343 substantive cases of trade secret infringement and concluded 334, with 51 cases concluded in 2025. Several cases involving “high-tech” trade secret infringement were concluded, clarifying rules while significantly increasing compensation for infringement and resolutely curbing trade secret infringement. The “Meta-Hybrid Resin” trade secret infringement case clarified that the People’s Court can use the right to request return or patent rights as a specific way to bear responsibility for ceasing infringement. The “Continuous Casting Machine” trade secret infringement case legally applied civil litigation evidence rules and standards of proof, not limiting the determination of the scope of civil infringement and compensation liability solely to the findings of prior criminal judgments, effectively increasing protection. The “Blast Furnace Gas Desulfurization Process” trade secret infringement case resulted in a compensation award of 50 million RMB, and clarified that based on the subjective fault of each infringer in the joint infringement, the intentional infringer can be ordered to bear punitive damages, while other infringers bear joint and several liability for compensatory damages within the corresponding scope. In the “Quartz Glass Fiber” trade secret infringement case, considering the infringement lasted for more than ten years, the scope of infringement was wide, the profits were enormous, and there was repeated infringement, the punitive damages multiplier was increased, and over 200 million RMB in compensation was awarded, reflecting the emphasis on protecting original innovation and core technologies in the aerospace and military industries. In the “Oral CBCT” trade secret infringement case, the method for determining the technical facts of the listed medical device product was clarified, and punitive damages were fully applied to support the right holder’s claim for nearly 200 million RMB in compensation, clearly protecting innovators and resolutely and forcefully combating infringers.
Regarding foreigners, the Report stated the following highlighting the acceptance of post-filing data in the “Semaglutide” patent invalidation case
Since its establishment, the court has handled 2,546 cases involving foreign parties and concluded 2,046 cases, including 475 cases concluded in 2025. The court has conscientiously fulfilled its international obligations, including equal protection and national treatment. Over the past seven years, the number of foreign-related cases has increased by an average of 18.7% annually, and more and more foreign entities are choosing to resolve intellectual property disputes in Chinese courts. In the “Natural Protease 3” trade secret infringement case, the court legally protected trade secrets formed abroad, and the foreign company and its parent company sent letters of thanks. The head of the foreign company even traveled to the court to present a banner of appreciation and recorded a thank-you video on site. In the “CETP Inhibitor” patent authorization case, the court legally determined that the patent application should be granted, and the foreign company wrote a letter stating that it “felt the profound legal expertise of Chinese judges and the determination and strength of Chinese judicial organs in strengthening intellectual property protection, which strengthened its confidence in investing and developing in China.” In the “Semaglutide” patent invalidation case, the court further clarified the rules and concepts for accepting supplementary experimental data, and the foreign company specially sent a banner and plaque to express its gratitude. In the patent invalidation case involving “network session association and management technology,” the court reasonably interpreted the patent claims of the foreign company and upheld their validity, demonstrating China’s fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory judicial environment. In the “tire molding machine” trade secret infringement and patent ownership case, the court equally protected the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese and foreign parties, effectively strengthening the protection of high-value technologies. In the PCT patent application case involving “container lids,” it was explicitly stated that modifications made by the applicant on the international filing date should be treated in good faith during the national phase, fully protecting the legitimate rights and interests of PCT applicants.
Other points of interest from the Report include:
Since its establishment, the court has accepted 24,602 cases and concluded 23,069 cases, including 4,679 cases accepted and 3,146 cases concluded in 2025. Judicial protection was strengthened. Since the implementation of the Civil Code in 2021 and the comprehensive establishment of the punitive damages system for intellectual property rights, punitive damages have been applied in 58 cases, with a total compensation amount of 2.05 billion RMB; 73 cases have received high compensation exceeding 10 million yuan since the court’s establishment, with a total compensation amount of 5.24 billion RMB. In 2025, 30 cases (a 66.7% increase year-on-year) applied punitive damages, with a total compensation amount of 1.13 billion yuan (a 29.4% increase year-on-year), averaging approximately 38 million RMB per case; 32 cases received high compensation exceeding 10 RMB yuan, with a total compensation amount of 2.54 billion RMB, averaging approximately 80 million RMB per case.
…
Since its establishment, the number of plant variety cases has maintained a high growth rate, with a total of 923 cases accepted (an average annual growth of 46.2%). Of these, 181 cases were concluded in 2025 (a year-on-year increase of 0.6%), with a 90% success rate for variety right holders. Since its establishment, punitive damages have been awarded in 23 cases, totaling nearly 76 million yuan, including nearly 62 million yuan in 12 cases in 2025. In the “NPOl 154” corn new variety infringement case, punitive damages of over 53 million yuan were awarded, setting a new record for plant variety infringement cases in my country and sending a strong signal of strict protection of breeding technology innovation.
…
Since its establishment, the court has handled 6,543 administrative cases involving the granting and confirmation of patents, plant varieties, and integrated circuit layout designs, of which 1,419 were concluded in 2025, with 109 cases reversed, resulting in a reversal rate of 7.7%.
The full text of the Report is available here (Chinese only).
