An anti suit injunction in China is a court order that stops a party from pursuing or continuing litigation in a foreign jurisdiction. Chinese courts have issued these orders with increasing frequency in cross-border patent disputes, particularly in cases involving standard essential patents and FRAND licensing terms.

For foreign businesses, a Chinese anti suit injunction can halt proceedings in your home country before you have time to respond effectively.

This article explains how Chinese courts issue anti suit injunctions, why they are used in patent disputes, and what foreign businesses should do to protect their position when one is filed against them.

Cross-border patent disputes can sometimes escalate beyond civil proceedings. Read our guide to criminal procedure in China to understand how the criminal justice system works and where it intersects with IP enforcement.

What An Anti Suit Injunction Is And Why It Matters

An anti-suit injunction (ASI) is a court order stopping a party from starting or continuing legal action in another country’s courts. Since 2020, Chinese courts have used ASIs mainly in patent disputes, creating new legal headaches for foreign companies operating in China.

Definition And Purpose Of An Anti Suit Injunction

An anti-suit injunction is a legal order from a court telling a person or company not to file or continue a lawsuit in another jurisdiction. The order targets the specific party, not the foreign court itself—so, it’s “in personam.”

ASIs serve a few key purposes in cross-border disputes. They prevent parties from running parallel lawsuits in multiple countries. They protect your legal rights from being undermined by competing court proceedings. They also help avoid conflicting judgments when different courts tackle the same issue.

This tool started in common law countries like the UK and US. These places developed ASIs to handle forum shopping—where parties hunt for the most favorable court. Civil law countries, on the other hand, used to reject anti-suit injunctions, seeing them as interference with another country’s courts.

How China Uses Anti Suit Injunctions In Patent Disputes

China doesn’t have a formal anti-suit injunction system in its laws. Instead, courts there developed ASIs through a legal concept called “behavior preservation” in the Civil Procedure Law. This approach first appeared in maritime cases back in 2008, but it really took off in patent disputes starting in 2020.

The first major case came in August 2020, when the Supreme People’s Court ordered Conversant to stop enforcing actions at a German court in a dispute with Huawei. The court set a daily fine of 1 million yuan for violations.

In September 2020, the Wuhan Intermediate People’s Court issued China’s first “global anti-suit injunction” in the Xiaomi v. InterDigital case. This order stopped InterDigital from seeking injunctions in India or anywhere else regarding 3G and 4G patents. It also blocked InterDigital from asking any other court to rule on licensing rates.

Chinese courts have issued similar ASIs in cases involving:

• Samsung v. Ericsson (December 2020)
• ZTE v. Conversant (September 2020)
• OPPO v. Sharp (October 2020)
• Huawei v. Netgear (December 2024, first anti-anti-suit injunction)

These injunctions usually target standard essential patents (SEPs)—the patents you need to implement tech standards like 4G or 5G networks.

Why Foreign Businesses Need To Take ASIs Seriously

Chinese anti-suit injunctions create real legal and financial risks if you’re involved in cross-border disputes. If a Chinese court issues an ASI against you, ignoring it can rack up serious daily fines. The Huawei case set a precedent with 1 million yuan per day in penalties.

Operating outside China doesn’t mean you can ignore a Chinese ASI. If you have assets, operations, or relationships in China, the court can enforce its orders against you. That enforcement power can affect your ability to do business in the world’s second-largest economy.

Chinese ASIs also complicate global litigation strategy. You may have to withdraw lawsuits you’ve already filed in other countries or find yourself blocked from enforcing favorable judgments you’ve won elsewhere. Because some Chinese ASIs have global reach, they can affect your legal actions in multiple places at once.

If you hold patents, license technology, or face intellectual property disputes with Chinese parties, you should keep a close eye on these developments. Chinese courts are getting more assertive about global patent disputes through ASIs.

If your dispute moves into criminal territory, having the right legal support is critical. Read our guide to criminal defense lawyers in China to understand what to look for and how qualified counsel can protect your position.

How Chinese Courts Handle Anti Suit Injunctions

Chinese courts use their existing behavior preservation system to handle anti-suit injunctions, not a separate legal framework. The Supreme People’s Court (SPC) and intermediate courts issue these orders to stop parties from pursuing litigation or arbitration in foreign jurisdictions.

Which Courts Can Issue Anti Suit Injunctions In China

The SPC can issue anti-suit injunctions in cases under its jurisdiction. It issued China’s first patent-related anti-suit injunction in August 2020 in Huawei v. Conversant.

Intermediate People’s Courts can grant these orders too. The Wuhan Intermediate People’s Court issued China’s first global anti-suit injunction in September 2020. The Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court has also granted several anti-suit injunctions in patent disputes.

Most of these injunctions come up in intellectual property cases, especially standard essential patent disputes. The courts can issue anti-anti-suit injunctions as well, like the SPC did in December 2024 in Huawei v. Netgear.

The Legal Basis For ASIs Under Chinese Law

Article 103 of the Civil Procedure Law serves as the foundation for anti-suit injunctions. It lets courts “prohibit the party from performing certain acts” when those actions might make judgment enforcement tough.

Chinese courts treat anti-suit injunctions as behavior preservation measures. This is different from property preservation, which freezes assets. The behavior preservation system started in 2012, though courts didn’t use it for anti-suit injunctions until 2020.

The Arbitration Law right now limits preservation measures to property only. A draft revision proposes adding behavior preservation rights for arbitration parties, which would give arbitration cases the same anti-suit injunction options as court litigation.

How The Process Works From Filing To Order

You need to file a lawsuit or arbitration claim to request an anti-suit injunction. Chinese law doesn’t allow standalone anti-suit injunction applications. If you don’t start proceedings within 30 days after the court grants preservation measures, the court lifts those measures.

You file your behavior preservation application with the court handling your case. The court checks if foreign proceedings might interfere with its jurisdiction or make enforcement difficult. Sometimes, Chinese courts grant preservation measures on their own initiative, even without an application.

The court usually rules quickly—sometimes in days or weeks. Orders often include daily fines for non-compliance, commonly set at 1 million yuan per day. The injunction stays in effect until the court issues its final judgment on the main case.

Anti Suit Injunctions And FRAND Licensing Disputes

Standard essential patents create unique legal challenges because companies must license them on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms while operating in multiple countries. Most Chinese anti-suit injunctions have come out of these SEP licensing disputes, often clashing directly with similar orders from courts in Europe and the US.

Why ASIs Are Common In Standard Essential Patent Cases

SEP licensing disputes almost always lead to parallel litigation since patents cover technology in several countries at once. When a patent holder and an implementer can’t agree on licensing rates, both sides often file cases in different jurisdictions to get a tactical edge.

Chinese courts started issuing ASIs for these disputes in 2020. In Huawei v. Conversant, the Supreme People’s Court ordered the patent holder to stop enforcing injunctions at the Düsseldorf Regional Court in Germany. This was China’s first use of behavior preservation measures to block foreign court proceedings in SEP cases.

The Xiaomi v. InterDigital case went further, creating a global anti-suit injunction. The Wuhan Intermediate People’s Court barred InterDigital from seeking injunctions anywhere in the world regarding 3G and 4G standard essential patents. The court also blocked InterDigital from asking any other court to set licensing rates during the Chinese proceedings.

Similar things happened in ZTE v. Conversant, OPPO v. Sharp, and Samsung v. Ericsson. Each case involved FRAND licensing disputes over wireless communication patents.

China vs Other Jurisdictions: How ASIs Compare

Chinese anti-suit injunctions differ from those in common law countries in a few ways. English courts usually issue ASIs only after confirming their own jurisdiction and deciding that foreign proceedings interfere with their authority. US federal courts focus more on international comity and use ASIs cautiously.

Chinese courts use the behavior preservation system from the Civil Procedure Law instead of a specific ASI framework. Article 103 lets courts prohibit parties from certain acts if those acts might make enforcement tough. This broader language gives Chinese courts more flexibility—they don’t need the traditional common law requirements.

Chinese ASIs can’t exist on their own. You have to file a lawsuit or arbitration case within 30 days, or the court lifts the preservation measures. So, every ASI is tied to a substantive case in China.

The penalties are different too. Chinese courts can impose daily fines up to 1 million yuan (about $139,675) for violations. That kind of financial pressure can be hard to ignore, even if you’re based outside China.

What Happens When Competing Injunctions Clash

Parallel proceedings can create jurisdictional chaos when courts in different countries issue clashing orders. The Huawei v. Netgear case in December 2024 made this obvious. Netgear filed for an anti-suit injunction in a US District Court to stop Huawei from pursuing Chinese court orders. The Supreme People’s Court fired back with an anti-anti-suit injunction—China’s first.

These competing injunctions put parties in impossible situations. Following one court’s order means you’re violating another’s. The clash raises thorny questions about judicial sovereignty, since each court claims authority to protect its own proceedings.

International comity doesn’t offer much help. Civil law countries like China used to reject ASIs as interference with other courts’ sovereignty. Now, Chinese courts issue them routinely in SEP cases, and foreign courts do the same.

If you’re caught between competing injunctions, there’s no easy way out. Some companies pull out of certain jurisdictions. Others accept fines in one country to comply with another court’s order. The uncertainty just makes SEP licensing negotiations even messier.

How Foreign Businesses Should Respond

If you’re a foreign business facing a Chinese anti-suit injunction, you need a plan—fast. Knowing your immediate options, thinking ahead about prevention, and getting experienced legal help can make the difference between protecting your interests and facing major penalties.

What To Do If You Are Served With A Chinese ASI

Act quickly if you’re served with a Chinese anti-suit injunction. Fines can be up to 1 million yuan per day for violations, so delays get expensive. First, review the restrictions in the order—some injunctions block only specific actions, while others stop all foreign proceedings related to the dispute.

Get legal counsel in both China and any other jurisdiction where you have litigation right away. You’ll need to decide whether to comply with the Chinese ASI, challenge it in Chinese courts, or keep going with your foreign proceedings and risk penalties. Each path has serious consequences.

Think about whether you have assets or operations in China that could be targeted by enforcement. Chinese courts can go after your Chinese subsidiaries, bank accounts, and property. If you want to challenge the injunction, you can file an objection with the issuing court, but success rates really depend on the details of your case.

How To Protect Your Position Before A Dispute Arises

Take a hard look at all contracts with Chinese parties and check that arbitration and jurisdiction clauses line up with where you’d actually want to resolve a dispute. Use clear language—don’t leave it up to interpretation. If you want to go the extra mile, you can add anti-ASI provisions, though, to be honest, Chinese courts might not always enforce them.

It’s smart to build relationships with good legal counsel in China before things go sideways. If you already have a lawyer you trust, you’ll be able to move quickly if a dispute pops up—maybe even file first in a Chinese court before the other side gets the chance.

Keep thorough records of your business dealings, and don’t just store them in China. If you get hit with an ASI, you’ll need evidence to back up your case in more than one country. Ask yourself if your business model or industry puts you at risk—tech, telecom, and IP licensing have seen the most ASI action from Chinese courts lately.

Why You Need Qualified Legal Counsel In China

Chinese anti-suit injunction practice is changing fast, and you really want someone who knows the ropes. The legal basis for ASIs in China comes from “behavior preservation” under the Civil Procedure Law, not a separate ASI system like you’d see in common law countries. This difference means you need counsel who gets both the law and how judges actually use it.

Your legal team should have real experience with Chinese IP disputes and cross-border fights. They need to know how Chinese courts look at jurisdiction and what might sway a judge to grant or deny an ASI. Timing matters—a lot. The first party to seek relief can have a real edge in Chinese courts.

Good counsel helps you navigate where Chinese law meets international arbitration rules and foreign court procedures. They’ll tell you if behavior preservation measures could spill into your arbitration and help you figure out compliance strategies that actually work in multiple jurisdictions.

Detention is a real risk in serious IP and commercial disputes in China. Read our guide to bail in China to understand how the process works and what options are available if you or a colleague is detained.

Conclusion: Anti Suit Injunction China

Anti suit injunctions in China have become a serious tool in cross-border patent disputes, particularly in standard essential patent and FRAND licensing cases. Chinese courts have shown a willingness to assert global jurisdiction, and the financial penalties for non-compliance can escalate quickly.

Foreign businesses cannot afford to treat a Chinese anti suit injunction as a distant legal problem. Acting early, with the right legal counsel in place, is the only reliable way to protect your position.

Understanding the full cost of patent litigation in China is an important part of any IP strategy. Read our guide to court fees in China to understand what to budget for before a dispute arises.

Frequently Asked Questions: Anti Suit Injunction China

Chinese anti-suit injunctions are a pretty new phenomenon, and they leave a lot of folks with questions—especially if you’re tangled up in cross-border disputes. You’ll mostly see these in patent cases, and the penalties for ignoring them can be hefty.

What is an anti suit injunction in China?

An anti suit injunction in China is a court order that stops a party from starting or continuing legal action in a foreign court, issued under the behavior preservation provisions of Article 103 of the Civil Procedure Law. China does not have a standalone anti suit injunction system — courts adapted existing preservation rules to achieve the same result, with the first orders appearing in maritime cases around 2008. To obtain one, you must file a lawsuit or arbitration claim at the same time, and if proceedings are not started within 30 days the order will be lifted.

Does China issue anti suit injunctions in patent cases?

Yes, Chinese courts regularly issue anti suit injunctions in patent cases, particularly involving standard essential patents. The Supreme People's Court issued China's first patent-related anti suit injunction in August 2020 in Huawei v Conversant, ordering Conversant to halt German enforcement proceedings under threat of a one million yuan daily fine. The Wuhan Intermediate People's Court followed in September 2020 with the Xiaomi v InterDigital case, issuing the first global anti suit injunction blocking InterDigital from seeking injunctions or licensing rate decisions anywhere in the world.

How does a Chinese anti suit injunction affect foreign court proceedings?

A Chinese anti suit injunction orders you to pause or withdraw cases in foreign courts while the dispute proceeds in China, with daily fines of up to one million yuan for non-compliance. Foreign courts generally do not recognize or enforce Chinese anti suit injunctions, which can leave you facing penalties from multiple jurisdictions simultaneously. Some foreign courts have responded by issuing their own anti anti suit injunctions, creating direct conflicts between competing court orders.

How do FRAND disputes relate to anti suit injunctions in China?

FRAND licensing disputes — covering fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms for standard essential patents — are the most common trigger for Chinese anti suit injunctions. Chinese courts use these orders to keep licensing rate decisions within their jurisdiction and prevent foreign courts from setting higher royalty rates for the same patents. The Xiaomi v InterDigital case demonstrated this clearly, with the Wuhan court claiming sole authority to set global licensing terms for the patents in dispute.

‍