Australia: Common types of patent claims in the field of chemical sciences

Last Updated: 12 October 2018
Article by Michael Zammit
Shelston IP

The purposes of the claims of a patent are to define the metes and bounds of an invention, and to place the public on notice of what constitutes an infringement. Generally speaking, the requirements for patent claims are that they must:

  • define the matter for which protection is sought, preferably in terms of the “technical features of the invention”,
  • be clear and concise/succinct, and
  • supported by matter disclosed in the specification, and enabled across their full scope.

Australia: Disruption in The IP Services?
Last Updated: 27 September 2018
Article by John Walker

Dennemeyer Group

“Is there disruption in the IP services industry?” This paper, based around the theme of the LES (Australia/New Zealand) Annual Conference which took place in May 2016, looks at that question from the different viewpoints of the players or stakeholders in the IP management. It also analyzes the IP life cycle or ecosystem and the products and/or services being supplied in the IP sector.

Australia: Amended Australian IP laws receive royal assent with little fanfare

Last Updated: 27 September 2018
Article by Georgina Hey and Isobel Taylor
Norton Rose Fulbright Australia

On 24 August 2018, the creatively named Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Productivity Commission Response Part 1 and Other Measures) Bill 2018 quietly received Royal Assent, with some parts of the new Act entering into force the following day.

As the name indicates, the primary focus of the new legislation is to implement the recommendations made by the Productivity Commission’s Inquiry Report on Intellectual Property Arrangements (PC Report), which we have discussed in previous articles here and here. Schedule 1 of the new Act contains these provisions, while Schedule 2 contains a number of additional minor amendments, generally intended to streamline the administration of Australia’s IP systems.

Tobacco: A New Direction To Developing Countries

Last Updated: 25 September 2018
Article by Prateek Tyagi
Khurana and Khurana

Australia in 2011 introduced The Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 20111 (“the TPP Act”) to tackle the health problem related to tobacco industry. This act bans logos and distinctively-colored cigarette packaging in favor of drab olive packets, with brand names printed in small standardized fonts. In response, plain packaging policy in Australia has faced multiple challenges from a global, well-resourced industry but the Australian Court upheld the tobacco plain packaging legislation. After that, this matter came before WTO panel, where WTO judges had been tasked with delivering findings on whether plain packaging violates the TRIPS agreement or creates technical barriers to trade. WTO panel rejected this complaint, which was brought by Cuba, Indonesia, Honduras and Dominican. The WTO panel said Australia’s law improved public health by reducing the use of tobacco products. It also rejected the argument that Australia had unjustifiably infringed tobacco trademarks and violated intellectual property rights.

Australia: New IP Laws Give More Green Lights for Parallel Imports but Add Shades of Grey for Counterfeit

Last Updated: 21 September 2018
Article by John Oddy and Nathan Mattock
Marque Lawyers

Okay, so we aren’t talking fifty shades here but new amendments to Australia’s IP laws may cause trade mark owners to think twice before they try and throw the book at importers.

In late 2016 the Productivity Commission released a report into Australia’s IP regime and boy was it a page turner. Finally, some of the Commission’s recommendations have been introduced. There’s more to come (the ‘Part One’ in the title of the Act is a bit of a spoiler), and all areas of IP will be affected.

The biggest change so far is one for the importers. Previously, importing goods that apply a registered trade mark without the consent of the owner caused an automatic infringement of the relevant mark, with no defence. Great for local trade mark owners trying to protect their brand from dodgy fakes entering the country or, with some creative contractual arrangements, circumventing Australia’s pro parallel importation policy. Not so great for importers, both those looking to import genuine goods from overseas and those who roll the dice on that deal from Alibaba.

Australia: Esports – is it a sport, a business or both? We look at the legal issues circling this new, weird millennial thing called esports

Last Updated: 17 September 2018
Article by Emma Johnsen and Nathan Mattock
Marque Lawyers

Unless you’ve been hiding under a rock, or outside in fresh air engaging in outdoor sport, you will have seen the explosion of what is known as esports (a.k.a. electronic sports).

What is esports?

Esports is competitive video gaming. We are talking about global audiences of 35 million, prize money of up to $25 million per tournament and crowds big enough to sell out Madison Square Garden three nights running. esports is a global industry that is tipped to have a market value of over $1 billion by 2020.

The minefield of legal issues

Think about a legal issue. Got one? It’s probably an issue in esports. Unless you thought of probate, which isn’t an issue in esports…yet.

New Zealand: Relaxation of Amendment Practice in New Zealand

Last Updated: 8 June 2018
Article by Amanda Lee and Michael Caine
Davies Collison Cave

With the introduction of the New Zealand Patents Act 2013, New Zealand Examiners adopted a strict approach to the assessment of amendments, requiring Applicants to specify support in the specification for each and every proposed amendment under Patent Regulation 58(d). However, in light of the recent Patent Office decision in CNH Industrial Belgium NV [2018] NZIPOPAT 7, Examiners should now relax their approach to assessment of amendments.

New Zealand: Amendments Clarify New Zealand Patent Practice

Last Updated: 24 April 2018
Article by Amanda Lee, Michael Caine and Alex Tzanidis
Davies Collison Cave

Changes introduced with the Patents Amendment Regulations 2018 have clarified New Zealand patent practice

The New Zealand Patents Regulations 2014 were amended on 8 March 2018 to correct some of the problems caused by the original regulations.

Changes to Microorganism Deposit Requirements

New Zealand: Is the daisy-chaining of NZ divisional patent applications about to get the glyphosate treatment?
Last Updated: 9 February 2018
Article by Gareth Dixon

Shelston IP

A New Zealand Government review concluded more than 16 months ago under which the facility to “daisy chain” divisionals from applications proceeding under the Patents Act 1953 was squarely under threat. Nothing of significance appears to have happened in the interim – at least publicly, and one assumes the Government (which,

of course, changed following the general election of September 2017) is carefully considering the feedback it received from stakeholders. Notwithstanding, there remains a rather short-priced favourite outcome in which certain changes to New Zealand divisional practice are likely, if not inevitable.


The content of our website is updated regularly. Subscribe to our newsletter and stay on top of new developments. Your email address is safe and will not be shared with any third party.