Intellectual Property Litigation in Russia and China: Digital Technologies for Specialized Courts

The digital transformation of judicial systems is reshaping not only the technical means of interaction between courts and participants in judicial proceedings but also the adjudicative process itself. These changes are of particular importance for specialized intellectual property courts, where disputes frequently arise in the digital environment and the effectiveness of judicial protection largely depends on the integration of modern technologies. In this context, a comparative analysis of the experiences of Russia and China is particularly relevant, as both countries are actively developing digital judicial tools while following different legal and institutional paths. The article aims to identify the distinctive features of the digital transformation of courts, define the main areas in which digital technologies are employed, and assess their significance for the judicial protection of intellectual property rights. The research employs comparative legal analysis, the formal legal method, and a system-based approach. It draws on the legislation of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China, decisions and regulations of their highest judicial authorities, and scholarly publications on the digitalization of justice. The paper demonstrates that digital technologies are now integrated into virtually every stage of judicial proceedings, including electronic document management, the submission and examination of electronic evidence, remote access to case files, automated case allocation, electronic judicial notifications, remote court hearings, and the use of artificial intelligence to support judicial decision-making. A comparison of the Russian and Chinese experiences shows that, although both countries pursue the common objective of improving the accessibility and effectiveness of judicial protection, they have adopted different models for the digitalization of the judiciary. The Russian approach is primarily based on the implementation of individual digital services, whereas the Chinese model emphasizes the gradual development of a unified digital platform integrating different stages of judicial proceedings. The study also identifies differences in approaches to electronic evidence, electronic interaction between courts and participants in judicial proceedings, and the use of artificial intelligence. The findings indicate that the digitalization of specialized intellectual property courts has evolved beyond a supporting function to become a prerequisite for the effective administration of justice in this field. Despite the differences between the two models, the experience of both countries indicates a gradual transition toward a comprehensive digital organization of judicial activities capable of ensuring more efficient, technologically advanced, and higher-quality adjudication of intellectual property disputes.