結夏安居

PART 9A

ARBITRATIONS RELATING TO

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

第9A節  與智慧財產權有關的仲裁

Interpretation of this Part

本節的解釋

52A.—(1) In this Part, unless the context otherwise requires, “intellectual property right” or “IPR” means —

(a)   a patent;

(b)  a trade mark;

(c)   a geographical indication;

(d)  a registered design;

(e)   a copyright;

(f)   a right in a protected layout design of an integrated circuit;

(g)  a grant of protection in respect of a plant variety;

(h)  a right in confidential information, trade secret or know how;

(i)   a right to protect goodwill by way of passing off or similar action against unfair competition; or

(j)    any other intellectual property right of whatever nature.

[23/2019]

52A.—(1) 在本節中，除非文意另有所指，“智慧財產權”是指：

(a)   專利；

(b) 商標；

(c)   地理標誌；

(d)  註冊外觀設計；

(e)   版權；

(f)   受保護的積體電路布圖設計中的權利；

(g) 給予植物品種的保護；

(h)  機密資訊、商業秘密或專有技術的權利；

(i)   通過抵制假冒經營或採取類似的反不正當競爭行為保護商譽的權利；

(j)    其他無論何種性質的智慧財產權。

(2) In this Part, a reference to an IPR includes an application for the registration of an IPR if the IPR is protectable by registration. 

如果一項智慧財產權可通過註冊獲得保護，則本節所稱智慧財產權亦包括該智慧財產權的註冊申請。

[23/2019]

(3) In this Part, “IPR dispute” includes —

(a)   a dispute over the enforceability, infringement, subsistence, validity, ownership, scope, duration or any other aspect of an IPR; 

(b)  a dispute over a transaction in respect of an IPR; and 

(c)   a dispute over any compensation payable for an IPR.

[23/2019]

(3) 在本節中，“智慧財產權爭議”包括：

(a)   關於智慧財產權的可執行性、侵權、存續、有效性、權屬、範圍、期限或其他方面的爭議；

(b)  關於智慧財產權交易的爭議；

(c)   關於應付給智慧財產權的賠償金的爭議。

(4) In this section, “registration”, in relation to an IPR, includes the grant of the IPR.

在本節中，智慧財產權的“註冊”包括授予智慧財產權在內。

[23/2019]

IPR disputes may be arbitrated

智慧財產權爭議可以仲裁

52B.—(1) The subject matter of an IPR dispute is capable of settlement by arbitration as between the parties to the IPR dispute. 

智慧財產權爭議的標的事項能夠在智慧財產權爭議的雙方當事人之間通過仲裁得到解決。

[23/2019]

(2)Subsection (1) applies whether the IPR dispute is the main issue or an incidental issue in the arbitration.

無論智慧財產權爭議是仲裁的主要問題還是附帶問題，均適用第(1)款的規定。

[23/2019]

(3) An IPR dispute is not incapable of settlement by arbitration only because a law of Singapore or elsewhere —

(a)   gives jurisdiction to decide the IPR dispute to a specified entity; and 

(b)  does not mention possible settlement of the IPR dispute by arbitration.

[23/2019]

(3) 智慧財產權爭議不會僅因新加坡或其他地方的法律有下列情形而無法通過仲裁得到解決：

(a)     將裁決智慧財產權爭議的管轄權授予特定實體；

(b)  沒有提到可能通過仲裁解決智慧財產權爭議。

(4) In subsection (3), “specified entity” means any of the following entities under the law of Singapore or elsewhere: 

(a)   a court;

(b)  a tribunal;

(c)   a person holding an administrative or executive office;

(d)  any other entity.

[23/2019]

(4) 在第(3)款中，“特定實體”是指新加坡或其他地方的法律規定的任何下列實體：

(a)   法院；

(b)  審裁庭；

(c)   擔任行政職務或主管職務的人；

(d)  任何其他實體。

Effect of award involving IPR

涉及智慧財產權的仲裁裁決的效力

52C.—(1)This section applies if an award deciding an IPR dispute is made in arbitral proceedings. 

如果在仲裁程序中作出決定智慧財產權爭議的仲裁裁決，則適用本條的規定。

[23/2019]

(2) The fact that a person is a third party licensee or third party holder of a security interest in respect of the IPR does not of itself make the person a person claiming through or under a party to the arbitral proceedings for the purposes of section 44(1).  

某人是智慧財產權的第三方被許可人或智慧財產權擔保權益的第三方持有人，這一事實本身並不使此人成為第44條第(1)款所稱的通過仲裁程序一方當事人或在仲裁程序一方當事人之下提出權利請求之人。

[23/2019]

(3) However, subsection (2) does not affect any right or liability between a third party licensee or third party holder of a security interest and a party to the arbitral proceedings whether — 

(a)   arising in contract; or 

(b)  arising by operation of law.

[23/2019]

(3) 然而，第(2)款不影響第三方被許可人或擔保權益的第三方持有人與仲裁程序的一方當事人之間符合下列情況的權利或責任：

(a)   無論是合同中產生還是

(b)  因法律實施而產生。

(4) In this section —

“third party holder of a security interest”, in relation to an IPR in dispute in arbitral proceedings, means a person who — 

(a)   is a holder of a security interest in respect of the IPR granted by a party to the arbitral proceedings; but

(b)  is not a party to the arbitral proceedings;

(4) 在本條中：

就仲裁程序中有爭議的智慧財產權而言，“擔保權益的第三方持有人”是指下列人員：

(a)   仲裁程序一方當事人授予的智慧財產權擔保權益的持有人；

(b)  但不是仲裁程序的一方當事人；

“third party licensee”, in relation to an IPR in dispute in arbitral proceedings, means a person who — 

(a)   is a licensee (whether or not an exclusive licensee) of the IPR under a licence granted by a party to the arbitral proceedings; but

(b)  is not a party to the arbitral proceedings.

[23/2019]

就仲裁程序中有爭議的智慧財產權而言，“第三方被許可人”是指以下人員：

(a)   根據仲裁程序的一方當事人授予的許可，成为智慧財產權的被許可人（無論其是否为獨家被許可人）；但

(b)  不是仲裁程序的當事人。

Setting aside award involving IPR

撤銷涉及智慧財產權的仲裁裁決

52D.—(1) For the purposes of section 48(1)(b)(i), the subject matter of a dispute is not incapable of settlement by arbitration under this Act only because the subject matter relates to an IPR dispute. 

就第48條第(1)款(b)項(i)目而言，爭議的標的事項不會僅因與智慧財產權爭議有關而無法根據本法通過仲裁得到解決。

[23/2019]

(2) For the purposes of section 48(1)(b)(ii), an award is not contrary to public policy only because the subject matter in respect of which the award is made relates to an IPR dispute. 

就第48條第(1)款(b)項(ii)目而言，即使仲裁裁決所關涉的標的事項與智慧財產權爭議有關，該仲裁裁決亦不會僅因此而與新加坡的公共政策發生衝突。

[23/2019]

Judgments entered in terms of award involving IPR

根據涉及智慧財產權的仲裁裁決登錄的判決

52E.—(1)This section applies if — 

(a)   an award deciding an IPR dispute is made in arbitral proceedings; and 

(b)  a judgment in terms of the award is entered under section 46.

[23/2019]

52E.—(1) 如有下列情形，則適用本條的規定：

(a)   決定智慧財產權爭議的仲裁裁決是在仲裁程序中作出的；

(b)  根據第46條登錄關於仲裁裁決的判決。

(2) Section 44(1) applies in relation to the judgment as if the reference in that section to an award made by an arbitral tribunal pursuant to an arbitration agreement were a reference to the judgment.  

第44條第(1)款適用於上述判決，猶如在該條款中所提述之仲裁庭依據仲裁協議作出的裁決，即為提述此項判決。

[23/2019]

(3) In this section, “award” includes a declaratory award. 

本條中所稱“仲裁裁決”包括宣告性裁決在內。

[23/2019]

【要点解析】

該法對於declaratory award 未作定義。我們可以參閱《元照英美法詞典》對相關詞條的解釋：declaratory judgment 確認判決；宣告式判決

指法院僅確認當事人之間的權利及其他法律關係而未規定可予強制執行等救濟措施的判決。不論當事人在此之後是否會據之請求給予救濟，法院都可以作出此種判決。通常在當事人對自己的權利或其他事項存在疑問時，可以請求法院就此作出確認判決，如保險公司請求法院確認某種風險是否屬於其保險單中規定的承保範圍。

Validity of patent may be put in issue in arbitral proceedings

在仲裁程序中可將專利有效性提出作為爭論點

52F. Section 82(2) of the Patents Act 1994 does not prevent a party from putting the validity of a patent in issue in arbitral proceedings.

《1994年專利法》第82條第(2)款不妨礙當事人在仲裁程序中將專利有效性提出作為爭論點。

[23/2019]

【要點解析】

put something in issue 將……提出作為爭論點；对……提出異議

參見《元照英美法詞典》的解釋：訴訟當事人一方在答辯中否認對方所宣稱的事實或問題。

《1994年專利法》第82條第(2)款：

原文網址：https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/PA1994?ProvIds=pr82-#pr82-

(2)The validity of a patent may not be put in issue in any other proceedings and, in particular, no proceedings may be instituted (whether under this Act or otherwise) seeking only a declaration as to the validity or invalidity of a patent.

【《1994年專利法》第82條第(2)款參考譯文】

不得在任何其他程序中對專利有效性提出質疑，特別是不得（無論是根據本法抑或其他法律）僅為尋求宣告專利有效或無效而提起訴訟。