The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPPhil) is inviting comments from the public on its proposed amendments to the rules and regulations governing the proceedings in administrative complaints for violation of intellectual property laws (infringement, unfair competition, etc), as well as other suggestions. The IPPhil's objective is to shorten the time it takes to issue decisions.
One of the more significant amendment being proposed is the removal of all provisions relating to depositions. Under the current rules of the IPPhil, the provisions on depositions and discoveries are similar to those under the Rules of Court for civil actions, which are intended to shorten the period of litigation and speed up the adjudication process. In Fortune Corporation v CA (GRN 108119, January 19 1994), the Supreme Court of the Philippines had the occasion to state that the availability and operation of a liberal discovery procedure has many benefits, for example it is of great assistance in ascertaining the truth and in checking and preventing perjury; it is an effective means of detecting and exposing false, fraudulent and sham claims and defences; it makes available in a simple, convenient and often inexpensive way facts which otherwise could not have been proved, except with great difficulty and sometimes not at all; it educates the parties in advance of trial as to the real value of their claims and defences, thereby encouraging settlements out of court; and it safeguards against surprise at the trial, prevents delays, and narrows and simplifies the issues to be tried, thereby expediting the trial.
Data from the IPPhil shows that the number of inter partes cases (IPC) and IP violation (IPV) cases filed and decided by the Bureau of Legal Affairs (BLA) are not so significantly apart to justify the removal of the provisions on discovery and depositions which apply only to IPV cases, as shown in the chart.
The same data source revealed that IPV cases only make up about 8% of the total cases handled by the BLA. What can be studied by the IPPhil is the plantilla or number of hearing officers comprising the BLA. From 2000 to 2004, there were only 499 IPC and IPV cases filed in the IPPhil, while for the five years from 2005 to 2009, the total number of cases filed went up to 1,459, or an increase of 292%. But the number of hearing officers remained at five. To date, no public hearing has been scheduled by the IPPhil for the amendments.
| Year |
IPC/IPV cases filed |
IPC/IPV cases decided |
| 2005 |
170 |
164 |
| 2006 |
222 |
309 |
| 2007 |
373 |
321 |
| 2008 |
384 |
316 |
| 2009 |
310 |
313 |
| Total |
1,459 |
1,423 |
 |
| Editha R Hechanova |
Hechanova Bugay & Vilchez
GF Chemphil Building Antonio Arnaiz Ave
Makati City 1223
Philippines
Tel: +63 2 888 4293
Fax: +63 2 888 4290
editharh@info.com.ph