论商业秘密民事救济与行政救济的定位与衔接  

Orientation and Connection of Trade Secret Civil Remedy and Administrative Remedy

作　　者：沈强[1] 

机构地区：[1]上海市第一中级人民法院,上海200336

出　　处：《世界贸易组织动态与研究（上海对外贸易学院学报）》2011年第2期31-37,64,共8页Journal of Shanghai University of International Business and Economics

摘　　要：在商业秘密侵权救济中,商业秘密权利人可以要求民事救济、行政救济和刑事救济,TRIPS协议和国外立法中对商业秘密侵权救济模式也有相应的立法例,笔者试图从这些侵权救济模式出发,分析商业秘密民事救济和行政救济中的法律问题,包括国外行政救济的有限性和我国的主要实践、行政救济的主体和管辖、不足与完善,商业秘密民事诉讼主体的确定和管辖问题。在此基础上研究了商业秘密侵权责任模式的界限,需要注意民事责任和行政责任的竞合以及行政、民事案件审理的交叉和协调,确立以民事救济为主导的救济模式,发挥行政救济的补充作用,完善民事救济和行政救济的定位和衔接。The trade secret legal remedy system is including civil remedy, administrative remedy and criminal remedy. Based on the mode of legal remedy in TRIPs agreements and domestic law, the author analyses some legal issues including the limitation of the administrative remedy in foreign countries, the subject and jurisdiction of administrative remedy, subject and jurisdiction of trade secret civil litigation etc. Then he researches the different condition and liability to apply in the civil and administrative remedy. He finds that the civil remedy is the main mode of the trade secret remedy, and the administrative remedy takes the supplementary effect in the legal remedy system. To deal with the orientation and connection of civil remedy and administrative remedy can improve the legal system of trade secret remedy.

关 键 词：商业秘密 民事救济 行政救济 定位与衔接 

分 类 号：D922.294[政治法律—经济法学] D923.49[政治法律—法学]