Australia seeks public submissions on proposed IP amendments

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Australia seeks public submissions on proposed IP amendments

IP Australia is seeking comments on the implementation of proposed changes that will bring the New Zealand and Australia patent regimes closer together

Australa and New Zealand

IP Australia's consultation paper outlines the new system, which would affect not only the regulation of the patent attorney profession but also create a single application process (SAP) as well as a single examination process for those patent applications (SEP).

This particular consultation focuses on the proposed changes for the implementation of the trans-Tasman patent attorney regime that will cover both countries. It also provides a brief overview of the proposed system allowing for filers to submit just one patent application for both countries as well as allow a patent examiner in either Australia or New Zealand to examine the application to determine whether to grant patents for that application in both countries.

Submissions are due February 15 and may be sent to consultation@ipaustralia.gov.au.

Some of the proposed amendments include treating the New Zealand Qualifications Framework as equivalent to the Australian Qualification Framework rather than as an overseas qualification, and reconstituting the current Professional Standards Board for Patent and Trade Marks Attorneys as the new Trans-Tasman IP Attorneys Board. Proposed transitional changes include allowing New Zealand-registered patent attorneys to register as Australian trade mark attorneys even though New Zealand currently does not have trade mark attorneys as a profession.

The consultation paper notes that there will be a separate consultation on the SAP and SEP provisions.

These proposed changes are part of Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Bill 2014, which was introduced in the House of Representatives earlier this year and passed on November 24. The bill also received its second reading in the Senate the next day. Compared to the Raising the Bar Amendments which came into effect in April 2013, the changes in this bill are relatively minor.

In addition to this consultation, IP Australia is also seeking public comments on an exposure draft of amendments to the regulations related to Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Bill 2014. Like comments concerning the trans-Tasman patent attorney regime, submissions are due February 15 and may be sent to consultation@ipaustralia.gov.au.

For more, see Managing IP's previous coverage of this bill.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Judge Alan Albright is to leave his role at the Western District of Texas, and could return to private practice
Stobbs has successfully seen off a contempt of court application filed against the firm and two of its lawyers
After almost a quarter of a century, Marshall Gerstein has a new managing partner
Abbott winning another round against Sinocare and Menarini, and 'long arm' clarification on the UK's position within the UPC, were also among major developments
Maria Peyman, head of IP at Birketts, explains why the firm is adopting a ‘seamless approach’ for clients by integrating two of its practice areas
Matthew Swinn, who leads the firm’s IP practice, discusses why Mallesons is well-placed to remain a major IP force
Lawyers at A&O Shearman analyse developments regarding UPC’s long-arm jurisdiction, including its scope and jurisdictional limits
Michelle Lee discusses reaching milestones at the USPTO, AI’s role in legal work, and how to empower women in tech and IP
Executive chair Matt Dixon, who reveals a new associate hire, says the firm wants to offer a realistic pathway to partnership while avoiding the ‘corporate machine’ route
Mayer Brown’s role in cardiovascular technology dispute reflects how firms are pursuing precedent-setting cases to try and guide AI and patent law
Gift this article