[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, punitive damages can be claimed for trademark infringement, but this requires satisfying two conditions: malice and serious circumstances. According to Article 63 of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on April 23, 2019), for malicious infringement of the exclusive right to use a trademark and serious circumstances, the compensation can be determined at a multiple of not less than one but not more than five times the actual losses of the right holder, the benefits obtained by the infringer, or the royalties. For intentional infringement, a fine of not less than one but not more than five times the amount of the infringement may also be imposed. In practice, courts strictly grasp the concepts of malice and serious circumstances, and ordinary infringements are usually compensated only on a flat basis. It is recommended to fix evidence such as the infringer's knowledge of the trademark and repeated infringements. For more details, please refer to the following link:Intellectual property protection and corporate legal services.

I. Problem Background and Typical Scenarios

Punitive damages are a powerful tool for trademark owners to increase the cost of infringement. Typical scenarios include: the infringer knowingly infringes a well-known trademark of others, repeatedly infringes despite repeated prohibitions, forges authorization chains, and gains huge profits from large-scale infringement; and the right holder holds a prior judgment but is still subject to continued infringement. Many right holders mistakenly believe that they can impose punitive damages as long as there is infringement, but in reality, they need to prove the infringer's subjective malice and the severity of the circumstances. For cases involving corporate contracts and authorizations, the court may combine the relevant evidence to determine the amount of punitive damages.Business and contract dispute resolution services for enterprises.

II. Key points of dispute

There are three key points. Firstly, malicious intent: whether the defendant was aware of the trademark rights, had received warning letters or judgments but still committed infringement. Secondly, serious circumstances: the scale of infringement, duration, profits gained, counterfeit labels, and damage to the right holder's business reputation. Thirdly, calculation basis: based on actual losses, infringement profits, or a multiple of the licensing fee, with a cap of five times. When handling similar cases in the Beijing area, the requirements for evidence of malicious intent and serious circumstances are high. Simply relying on the fact of infringement is not enough to trigger punitive measures. For cases involving compensation enforcement, reference can be made to the relevant provisions.Special services and other case services.

III. Professional analysis by Hengluo Lawyers

Taking the trademark infringement and unfair competition case handled by Attorney Liu Yuanyuan as an example: Company B was authorized to use the EFGK trademark to produce and sell sanitary napkins in September 2023, but was sued by the well-known trademark holder A Company of EFGH in April 2024 for compensation of 980,000 yuan. Attorney Liu Yuanyuan argued that the logo had legal authorization, the suffix differences were not similar, the packaging and decoration had a patent basis, and the high compensation was unfounded. The court found trademark infringement but rejected unfair competition, and awarded compensation of 60,000 yuan (50,000 yuan for economic losses plus 10,000 yuan for reasonable expenses), without supporting punitive damages, because Company B used the trademark under legal authorization and the infringement was relatively minor. This case was handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Liu YuanyuanThe attorney (practice license number: 11101202011201094, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent in this case. Note: If there is legal authorization and the circumstances are minor, it is difficult to trigger punitive damages; conversely, if the defendant knowingly infringes repeatedly, the right holder may claim double compensation according to Article 63. The team also handled a franchise contract dispute represented by Attorney Xiong Binrong (practice license number: 11101202211410897, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) and a successful commercial defamation retrial case represented by Attorney Dang Pei (practice license number: 11101201911130220, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ), both of which focused on providing precise evidence regarding the boundaries of trademark rights.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The core basis is Article 63 of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on April 23, 2019) regarding punitive damages (more than one but less than five times the amount of the infringement, with malicious intent and serious circumstances), Article 64 regarding the defense of legitimate sources; and the provisions on confusion in the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on April 23, 2019). Practical suggestions: Claim punitive damages based on evidence showing that the other party was aware of the infringement (warning letters, previous judgments, or defects in authorizations); collect evidence on the scale of the infringement and the profits obtained; exercise caution in applying punitive damages to bona fide sellers who defend themselves with the defense of legitimate sources; and select a favorable base amount for calculating damages. For cases involving contract and authorization reviews, relevant evidence can be combined accordingly.Intellectual property protection and corporate legal servicesCoordination.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

Punitive damages are a double-edged sword: the right holder must have solid evidence of malice and circumstances, otherwise they will only receive compensatory damages; if the defendant does have legitimate authorization and the circumstances are minor, they should actively provide evidence to preclude punitive damages. It is recommended to establish trademark monitoring and warning letter filing in business operations, which not only protects oneself but also avoids being accused of malice. For trademark-related criminal risks, an assessment can be conducted in combination with specialized services and other case services.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Can the punitive damages claimed for trademark infringement really be obtained, and is the chance of success high?

It can be claimed, but it's not necessarily supported. The court requires proof of both the infringer's malice and the seriousness of the infringement, and both are indispensable. If there is legal authorization and the infringement is minor, usually only compensatory damages will be awarded; if the infringer knowingly infringes the trademark, commits repeated infringements, or operates on a large scale, punitive damages may be imposed in the range of one to five times the actual damages. The outcome depends on the evidence. Lawyers can help you sort out the chain of malice and circumstances, but they cannot guarantee that the infringement will be proven, let alone guarantee a victory.

Q2: If I want to claim punitive damages, what evidence do I need to prepare?

The core elements include: evidence of the ownership and popularity of the trademark rights (registration certificate, well-known trademark identification); evidence of the other party's knowledge (warning letters and receipts, previous judgments, and flaws in the authorization chain); evidence of the scale of infringement and profits (sales data, customs declarations, and promotional materials); duration and scope; and materials demonstrating damage to the business reputation. The evidence should be organized around the elements of malice and serious circumstances, with the most favorable basis being the actual losses, infringement profits, or the multiple of the licensing fees.

Q3: For punitive damages in trademark infringement cases, how much does it cost to hire a lawyer?

The attorney's fees are negotiated between the law firm and the client. In intellectual property cases, fees are usually charged on a contingency basis or based on a percentage of the litigation amount, with the specific terms subject to the contract. There is no nationwide standard pricing. If the claim involves extensive evidence collection and calculations, the fees will increase accordingly. It is recommended to request a detailed fee breakdown, clarifying the stages of representation and whether it includes litigation fees, investigation fees, and other third-party costs. This should be weighed against the potential compensation amount to assess the cost-effectiveness of the case.

Q4: How long does it usually take from the filing of a lawsuit to the issuance of a judgment on punitive damages?

The first-instance ordinary procedure for trademark infringement cases is completed within six months, and the simplified procedure is completed within three months; cases involving complex compensation calculations, requiring audits or obtaining sales data, will take longer. Punitive damages involve determining malice and the circumstances of the infringement, often requiring more comprehensive evidence, which prolongs the process accordingly. Overall, it often takes several months from filing to judgment. It is recommended to fix the evidence of malice and clarify the calculation basis before litigation to reduce the uncertainty of the trial process.

Q5: I want to claim punitive damages. What should I do in the first step?

There are four steps recommended: First, sort out the ownership of the trademark rights and its popularity, as well as evidence showing that the other party is aware of the infringement; Second, entrust a lawyer to verify the scale of the infringement and the profits gained, and select a favorable basis for compensation; Third, in the litigation, claim malice and serious circumstances in accordance with Article 63 of the Trademark Law, and specify the multiplier range; Fourth, if the defendant claims to have a legitimate source of defense, distinguish between the manufacturer and the seller and require them to provide evidence separately. Throughout the process, keep warning letters and communication records.

The above content is based on the compilation of judicial practices in the Beijing area. The facts of individual cases and the jurisdiction of the court may affect the conclusions. Welcome to consult Henglu Law Firm for specific situations.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, so as to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Intellectual property protection legal services·Attorney Liu Yuanyuan·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and open adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.