In October 2026, Fuzhou Intermediate People’s Court handed down a first‑instance judgment in a trademark infringement and unfair competition dispute involving the "Huiyuan" brand. Beijing Huiyuan Food & Beverage Co., Ltd. won the case. The three defendant enterprises were ordered to cease infringement, stop using the trade name "Huiyuan", and pay joint‑and‑several damages totalling RMB 97.338 million. This nearly 100‑million‑yuan award marks a phased legal conclusion to the nearly two‑year‑long dispute over corporate control and brand ownership between new and former shareholders following Huiyuan’s restructuring.

The plaintiff, Beijing Huiyuan Food & Beverage Co., Ltd., founded in 1994 and headquartered in Shunyi, Beijing, is the owner of the "Huiyuan" brand and trademarks. After completing restructuring in 2023, the company holds the "Huiyuan" brand, sales channels and part of production lines, and operates under an asset‑light model.

Defendant 1: Beijing Huiyuan Group Kaifeng Co., Ltd. Founded in 2005 and registered in Kaifeng, Henan Province, with a registered capital of RMB 200 million, it is wholly‑owned by Hebei Huiyuan Food & Beverage Co., Ltd. and was a production entity within the former Huiyuan Group system.

Defendant 2: Beijing Huiyuan Biotechnology Co., Ltd. Established in 2008 in Miyun, Beijing. Its shareholders are Luzhong Huiyuan Food & Beverage Co., Ltd. (70% shareholding) and Huiyuan Beijing Holdings Co., Ltd. (30% shareholding). It is also an affiliated enterprise of the former Huiyuan Group.

Defendant 3: Hebei Huiyuan Food & Beverage Co., Ltd. Founded in 2007 with a registered capital of approximately RMB 3.614 billion. It is the sole shareholder of Beijing Huiyuan Group Kaifeng Co., Ltd. and was once a shareholder of Beijing Huiyuan Food & Beverage Co., Ltd. It was held liable in this case not for direct infringement, but as the shareholder of a one‑person limited liability company for failing to prove that its property was independent from that of the company.

From OEM Cooperation to Courtroom Confrontation

The root of this dispute dates back to the transition period of Huiyuan’s judicial restructuring.

Beijing Huiyuan is the right‑holder of a series of registered "Huiyuan" trademarks, including Trademark No.1643301 and No.4683709. After completing judicial restructuring in 2023, Beijing Huiyuan outsourced most of its juice OEM production to enterprises within the former Huiyuan Group system and granted corresponding trademark‑use licences. Beijing Huiyuan Group Kaifeng Co., Ltd. and Beijing Huiyuan Biotechnology Co., Ltd. were exactly its OEM partners in that phase.

A turning point came on January 1, 2025.

Beijing Huiyuan formally terminated all trademark‑use licences granted to Kaifeng Huiyuan and Huiyuan Biotechnology. According to disclosures by Beijing Huiyuan, it stopped signing production‑sales agreements with the two companies starting from the fourth quarter of 2024. However, after the licences lapsed, the defendants kept producing and selling juice products bearing the "Huiyuan" mark and continued to include "Huiyuan" in their corporate names. After multiple written notices and warnings yielded no results, Beijing Huiyuan filed a lawsuit with Fuzhou Intermediate People’s Court.

Trial Findings

Fuzhou Intermediate People’s Court found that Kaifeng Huiyuan and Huiyuan Biotechnology, with full knowledge that trademark licences had expired on January 1, 2025, kept using identical or similar marks to the registered trademarks on juice products they produced and sold, thus infringing upon Beijing Huiyuan’s exclusive right to use registered trademarks.

Meanwhile, the two companies used corporate names containing "Huiyuan" on products manufactured and sold without authorisation, which was sufficient to cause confusion among relevant public and constituted unfair competition.

The court further held that Hebei Huiyuan, as the sole shareholder of Kaifeng Huiyuan, failed to provide evidence proving the separation between its own property and the company’s assets. Pursuant to the Company Law, it shall bear joint‑and‑several liability for Kaifeng Huiyuan’s debts.

Judgment Outcomes

The first‑instance judgment ordered the defendants to perform the following obligations:

1. Cease using the trade name "Huiyuan". Kaifeng Huiyuan and Huiyuan Biotechnology shall immediately remove "Huiyuan" from their enterprise names to eliminate the source of market confusion at the entity level.
2. Stop infringing acts. Fully halt production and sales of the accused infringing products.
3. Public clarification. Publish a clarifying statement in China Market Regulatory News to eliminate adverse market impacts.
4. Compensation for losses. Kaifeng Huiyuan and Huiyuan Biotechnology shall jointly compensate Beijing Huiyuan for economic losses, punitive damages and reasonable litigation expenses totalling RMB 97.338 million; Hebei Huiyuan shall bear joint‑and‑several liability for the above‑mentioned debts.

Breakdown of Damages

According to Beijing Huiyuan’s disclosure, the nearly 100‑million‑yuan damages consist of three parts:

1. Economic loss of RMB 48.544 million: calculated based on total invoiced prices during the defendants’ OEM cooperation period, referencing the industry‑average gross profit margin of approximately 30%.
2. Punitive damages of RMB 48.544 million. Considering that the defendants used to be affiliated entities, kept infringing with knowledge of licence termination, and the infringement was broad‑ranging and large‑scale, the court awarded additional punitive damages equal to the compensatory amount.
3. Reasonable litigation expenses of RMB 250,000 for costs incurred by the right‑holder to enforce its rights.

This is a first‑instance judgment and has not yet taken legal effect; the defendants have filed an appeal.

After the judgment, Huiyuan Group issued a Solemn Statement on 19 October 2026, announcing that the group and its subsidiaries would no longer produce juice products bearing the "Huiyuan" trademark, terminate relevant OEM contracts and fully launch its new brand "Zan Jia Guo Yuan". Beijing Huiyuan subsequently responded, reiterating that it is the sole legitimate right‑holder of the registered "Huiyuan" trademarks. These public announcements mark the formal operational separation between entities of the former Huiyuan Group system and the "Huiyuan" brand.

This first‑instance judgment from Fuzhou Intermediate People’s Court provides clear legal support for Beijing Huiyuan on brand ownership. Nevertheless, for ongoing capital contribution disputes, corporate‑governance litigations and the operational separation between both sides, the nearly 100‑million‑yuan award represents the end of one chapter rather than the conclusion of the whole conflict.

Conclusion

The single "Huiyuan" trademark reflects legacy issues of ambiguous rights and obligations during corporate restructuring, as well as full‑scale games over brands, assets and control between new and former shareholders. With the nearly 100‑million‑yuan first‑instance award, a phased legal conclusion has been reached. Operational separation and restructuring in the commercial sphere are still underway. For this enterprise embedded in generations’ memories of fruit‑juice consumption, the real test may not lie in winning or losing a lawsuit, but in how the brand and business can find their proper positions amid lingering disputes.