Foshan Ceramics EU Customs Detention — Maritime Injunction and Cross-Border IP Coordination

Court: Guangzhou Maritime Court (2024)

Facts: A Foshan ceramics company (petitioner) owned the "XX Ceramics" registered trademark, but its EU-bound goods were detained by German customs on suspicion of infringing an Italian company's design patent. The petitioner urgently applied to the Guangzhou Maritime Court for a maritime injunction ordering the carrier to suspend delivery and provide shipping documents for IP confirmation proceedings.

Holding:

(1) Finding prima facie evidence of lawful IP ownership and irreparable harm absent injunctive relief, the court granted the maritime injunction;

(2) The injunction ordered the carrier to suspend delivery and provide the B/L, packing list, and other documents;

(3) The petitioner used the injunction and evidence to seek German customs release, ultimately establishing non-infringement and clearing the goods.

集装箱码头岸桥装卸作业

Significance:

· Innovates a coordinated mechanism of maritime injunction, customs protection, and cross-border enforcement, providing an efficient path for exporters facing overseas detentions;

· Highlights the maritime court's role in cross-border IP disputes, filling the time gap left by traditional channels;

· Reminds exporters to prepare IP filings and use maritime injunctions to mitigate overseas detention losses.

Related Articles

Foshan Ceramics EU Customs Detention — Maritime Injunction and Cross-Border IP Coordination

Court: Guangzhou Maritime Court (2024) Facts: A Foshan ceramics company (petitioner) owned the "XX Ceramics" registered trademark, but its EU-bound goods were detained by German customs on suspicion of infringing an Italian company's design patent. The petitioner urgently applied to the Guangzhou Maritime Court for a maritime injunction ordering the carrier to suspend delivery and […]

Read

Zhaoqing Chemical v. Hong Kong Forwarder — Choice of Law in Hong Kong-Related Forwarding

Court: Guangzhou Maritime Court (2024) Facts: A Zhaoqing chemical enterprise (plaintiff) engaged a Hong Kong forwarder (defendant) for imported chemical raw materials, with no written contract beyond WeChat communications. Upon arrival at Huangpu Port, some raw materials were moisture-damaged, causing 600,000 RMB in losses. The plaintiff sued for compensation; the defendant argued Hong Kong law […]

Read