Modern Social Science Research

Patent malicious litigation constitutes a novel form of rights abuse in intellectual property, distorting the foundational values of patent systems and subverting procedural justice. Through empirical and normative analysis, this study exposes structural contradictions in Chinas legal framework. The Civil Procedure Laws formal review standards inadvertently facilitate malicious litigation, while inadequate procedural sanctions fail to redress cost-benefit imbalances. The Civil Codes tort liability provisions, constrained by full compensation principles, overlook irreparable damages like reputational harm and market opportunity losses. The Criminal Laws false litigation charge encounters prosecutorial challenges due to conflicts between statutory elements and patent validity presumptions, compounded by technical fact verification complexities. Judicial practice further suffers from ambiguous subjective malice criteria and inadequate indirect evidence rules, intensifying legal uncertainties. Proposed solutions include: Establishing multi-tiered malice determination standards integrating subjective intent and objective factors like patent stability assessments and abnormal litigation patterns. Reforming damage compensation mechanisms through Patent Law punitive damages and systematic litigation abuse regulation Enhancing judicial application of false litigation charges via purposive interpretation of "fabricated facts" and systemic evaluation of cross-regional batch litigation impacts. This interdisciplinary analysis synthesizes intellectual property law, procedural law, and criminal law perspectives, supported by law-economics deterrence theory and cost internalization principles to advance collaborative governance frameworks.

Patent malicious litigation; False litigation; Regulatory path