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

Cookies Settings

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

Junior lawyers aren’t unwilling to work hard, as some seniors believe; rather, they are rejecting traditional career advancement models that have limited payoff
Rebekah Gay discusses overcoming self-doubt, supporting the next generation of women lawyers, and how changing client demands are reshaping IP practice
New filing data suggests Germany's grip on UPC litigation remains strong, while Bardehle Pagenberg, Arnold Ruess, Hogan Lovells and Carpmaels notch up notable cases
In 27 years, KASS has expanded to seven countries in southeast Asia and is now eyeing further growth opportunities. Its CEO shares her perspective
Mine Güner discusses bridging law and business, taking the initiative, and why Taylor Swift helped put copyright on the map
Cindy Goh discusses why she launched Cheang & Ariff's IP department, the improving litigation environment in Malaysia and what to consider when using AI
Increased focus on adding patent litigation depth to the firm’s Dallas office was behind the boutique’s most recent hires
IPH's Canadian acquisitions are paying off on paper, but a couple of strong years may not be enough to show that the group's strategy has truly won over the market
Examiner statistics could help patent prosecution practitioners tailor strategies, turning an area of high variability into a potential competitive advantage
The England and Wales High Court’s ruling in Accord v Novartis may not rewrite the law on plausibility, but it does signal a pragmatic approach that could provide greater certainty for life sciences innovators
Gift this article