>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
Liu Bingzheng v. Beijing Kangda Automobile Installation & Repair Factory (A case about disputes over a Contract on Licensed Patent Implementation)
刘秉正诉北京市康达汽车装修厂专利实施许可合同纠纷案
【法宝引证码】
  • Type of Dispute: IPR-->IPR Contract
  • Legal document: Judgment
  • Judgment date: 05-25-1989
  • Procedural status: Trial at Second Instance
  • Source: SPC Gazette,Issue 3,1989

Liu Bingzheng v. Beijing Kangda Automobile Installation & Repair Factory (A case about disputes over a Contract on Licensed Patent Implementation)
(A case about disputes over a Contract on Licensed Patent Implementation)
刘秉正诉北京市康达汽车装修厂专利实施许可合同纠纷案

Liu Bingzheng v. Beijing Kangda Automobile Installation & Repair Factory

 

刘秉正诉北京市康达汽车装修厂@#

(A case about disputes over a Contract on Licensed Patent Implementation)@# 专利实施许可合同纠纷案@#
@# @#
BASIC FACTS@# 原告(转让方):刘秉正,男,51岁,北京市供电局助理工程师(现停薪留职)。@#
Plaintiff (transferor): Liu Bingzheng, male, 51 years old, assistant engineer of Beijing Power Supply Bureau (now remaining at post without salary)@# 委托代理人:史治清,北京市第二律师事务所律师。@#
Attorney: Shi Zhiqing, lawyer of Beijing No.2 Law Office@# 委托代理人:程勇,矿冶研究院分析室化验员。@#
Attorney: Cheng Yong, laboratory technician of the Analysis Office of the Mining & Metallurgy Research Institute@# 被告(受让方):北京市康达汽车装修厂(原北京市第二福利院汽车修理厂)。@#
Defendant (transferee): Beijing Kangda Automobile Installation & Repair Factory (former Beijing No.2 Orphanage Garage)@# 法定代表人:赵福贵,厂长。@#
Legal representative: Zhao Fugui, factory director@# 委托代理人:贾小梅,北京市第三律师事务所律师。@#
Attorney: Jia Xiaomei, lawyer of Beijing No.3 Law Office@# 原告刘秉正诉被告北京市康达汽车装修厂专利实施许可合同纠纷案,北京市中级人民法院依法组成合议庭,经公开审理查明:@#
For disputes over a contract on licensed patent implementation, the plaintiff, Liu Bingzheng, brought a lawsuit against the defendant, Beijing Kangda Automobile Installation & Repair Factory, and Beijing Intermediate People's Court legally formed a collegiate bench and through an open trial found that:@# 1987年4月28日,原告刘秉正与被告康达汽车装修厂签订了“蜂窝煤采暖炉”专利实施许可合同(专利号:85201863.0),合同规定,原告负责提供技术图纸和技术交底,并尽快帮助被告能独立生产蜂窝煤采暖炉;被告负责投资、生产设备、材料运输和出售产品,每月给付原告入门费400元,从合同生产之日起3年为止;原告在被告厂帮助工作期间,由被告发给适当工资;商品销售后,提取销售额的4%作为专利技术实施费支付给原告;被告不得将该项技术转让给他方;合同当事人如有一方违反合同的有关条款,由违约方偿付对方违约金2万元。@#
...... 合同签订后,原告即带着该项技术的专利资料、技术图纸到被告厂进行技术指导,并直接参与蜂窝煤采暖炉的制造。1987年5月9日,原告用废旧材料组装出第1台样炉;6月5日又组装出第2台样炉。在此期间,由原告直接指导,在原技术图纸、样炉的基础上,被告绘制出新的技术图纸。此时,被告已完全掌握了制造蜂窝煤采暖炉的专利技术。但合同规定给付原告的入门费,被告却分文未付,只给了100元工资。同年7月份,双方发生争议。从此,原告再未到被告厂进行技术指导。1987年11月10日,在委托代理人的参与下,经协商,双方又签订了一份补充协议,内容主要是:双方商定继续履行合同;原告提出放弃5至8月份4个月的入门费1600元,被告主动提出支付9至11月份的3个月的入门费1200元。同时明确议定每月5日被告照付原告入门费400元;原告收到1200元入门费的同时,交给被告最新图纸一套,并送一台样板炉供被告制造时参考。双方口头约定11月12日去北京市专利事务所对上述协议办理正式登记手续,原告按约带图纸前去,但被告未去,也未支付1200元入门费。为此,原告于1988年1月向北京市中级人民法院起诉,要求法院判令被告给付5至11月份入门费2800元;按合同规定偿付违约金2万元;并要求解除合同。被告答辩认为,合同签订至今,原告未向被告出示过该产品的技术图纸,只是临时画些草图示意,使已生产出来的样炉无法检验,技术、质量是否合格亦无标准。因此,未向原告支付入门费。合同没有全面履行的原因是双方造成的,而且原告责任大于被告,故要求原告偿付违约金和5000元经济损失。@#
 ......

Dear visitor, you are attempting to view a subscription-based section of lawinfochina.com. If you are already a subscriber, please login to enjoy access to our databases. If you are not a subscriber, you can pay for a document through Online Pay and read it immediately after payment.
An entity user can apply for a trial account or contact us for your purchase.
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570712
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail: database@chinalawinfo.com

 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法律英文网会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容;
单位用户可申请试用或者来电咨询购买。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570712
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:database@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
 
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese