[Article / Unfair Competition Law] Practice and theory of preservation of evidence in IP cases (Takashi Takamura, Patent, June 2025)

Read the Japanese version / 日本語版を読む

Article information

Article type: Publication review

Categories: Other Japanese law

Main topics: Litigation procedure / Proof of infringement

First published on this website: October 1, 2026

Display/classification checked: 2026-10-10

[Article / Unfair Competition Law] Practice and theory of preservation of evidence in IP cases (Takashi Takamura, Patent, June 2025)

1. Choice of jurisdiction

District courts with specialized IP divisions tend to have low grant rates of around 40% (Tokyo District Court IP division statistics). The article's author, however, has achieved a 100% grant rate by applying to summary courts and recommends using them.

2. Theory and legal nature of preservation of evidence

Its essence is bringing forward the examination of evidence. A prima facie showing of the risk of concealment, disposal or alteration of evidence (grounds for preservation) is necessary, but in IP practice even abstract prima facie showings tend to be accepted.

3. Defensive measures for the opposing party

Preservation of evidence carries no physical coercive power, so refusing to present evidence is an option.

This creates a risk in the main proceedings that allegations will be deemed true (Code of Civil Procedure Article 224), but later presentation during examination of evidence may avoid it; tactical consideration is required.

https://lnkd.in/g484nSmN

Original article: https://lnkd.in/gN2i4zuE

知財事件における証拠保全の実際と理論等

Originally posted on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7510851057082699778/

Related articles

Shared topic: evidence in IP litigation — [Publication review] [Article / IP Generally] Patent attorneys as judicial research officials (Kazumune Takamura and Yuji Iwanaga, Patent, November 2025)

Shared topic: proving infringement, including trade-secret cases — [Case note] [Unfair Competition Prevention Act / Trade secrets]

Shared topic: Litigation procedure — Osaka High Court, Heisei 23 (Ne) No. 2651 — Unfair Competition Prevention Act

Updates and corrections

Substantive corrections and additions are recorded separately from classification, related links and display changes.

October 1, 2026: First publication of the author's original LinkedIn text on this website. Article type, categories, topic tags, sources and consultation navigation added.

2026-10-01 | Related articles: added reciprocal links with shared-topic or comparative grounds; original text unchanged.

2026-10-01 | Display maintenance: added case references stated in the original or language-alternate metadata; not a revalidation of legal analysis.

2026-10-01 | Name notation: replaced verified Japanese-script personal names with Roman-letter forms in this English article and its navigation. Legal analysis and original publication date unchanged.

Consultation and inquiries

Find information and contact details by consultation purpose

2026-10-10: Updated related-article links. The original article text was not changed.

2026-10-10: Standardized related-article links to their published URLs. The original article text was not changed.