Interview: Sarah Matheson, AIPPI Reporter General

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

Interview: Sarah Matheson, AIPPI Reporter General

In an interview with the AIPPI Congress News, Reporter General Sarah Matheson provides a guide to what’s happening during this week’s Congress





Sarah Matheson
Sarah Matheson

“It’s a lot of work but very satisfying,” says Sarah Matheson, a partner of Allens in Australia who is mid-way through her first time as AIPPI Reporter General. Along with her team, she is responsible for all the policy, consultation and external representation work of AIPPI. This comprises what she calls the “three pillars” of the working questions and resolutions, the educational sessions at the Congress and the work of the 21 standing committees.

And the work never stops. Yesterday, the working questions for next year’s Congress in Milan were introduced (see article opposite). Then, soon after this year’s Congress, the national and regional working groups will be invited to submit suggestions for topics that will eventually form the educational sessions in Milan and the working questions for the following Congress in Sydney in 2017.

“We get an amazing, sometimes overwhelming response from the national and regional groups, with over 100 proposals,” says Matheson. The Reporter General team narrow those down by focusing on issues that are topical and relevant, of practical interest and in an area where AIPPI can make a contribution to the development of the law. When it comes to deciding the four working questions to be tackled each year, they aim to cover the four areas of patent, trade mark/design, copyright and general IP issues. This year, two alternatives for each area were put to the Executive Committee before the final four were chosen.

However, not all the groups’ suggestions will lead to working questions being debated. Some lend themselves to educational sessions, perhaps because they warrant more analysis or are more particularly suited to interests in the host country. Sometimes, topics that are discussed in workshops this year will develop into working questions in the future. That is true of the panel on industrial designs and functionality this year.

This year, Matheson notes that once again there is a stream of pharmaceutical workshops, spanning trade mark, patent and technology transfer issues as well as the topical issue of personalised medicine. Expect that to address the recent Australian High Court decision in Myriad, which Matheson says took many Australian practitioners by surprise. There is also a double session on FRAND issues, which includes in-house counsel and judges and will look at the many recent developments worldwide on this thorny issue. And of particular interest to local practitioners will be the workshops on green technology and plant variety protection. “I know these are both big topics here in Brazil,” says Matheson.

There are two ticketed lunchtime panels, taking place today and tomorrow. Today’s will feature officials from the Australian, Brazilian and Japanese IP offices and will look at improving IP systems. Tomorrow’s panel will have an industry focus with speakers from Embraer, Canon and 3M and will be chaired by Matheson herself. “We will be addressing how to manage innovation in an anti-IP climate,” she explains. “IP has become much broader, there is greater politicisation and more recognition of its economic significance. This creates a new environment and raises questions about how strong, and how open, IP systems should be. I am looking forward to getting different perspectives on these questions.”



more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Cabinet M Oproiu’s Raluca Vasilescu explains why AI is changing what clients expect from patent attorneys, where the technology is overhyped and what the next generation will need to do differently
As clients demand more flexible fees and AI-driven efficiencies, IP firms are rethinking pricing without abandoning the value of their work
HG Law was formed largely by ex Fish & Neave lawyers who left after the latter's merger with Ropes & Gray; now those experiences are shaping its latest combination
David Rodrigues and Evan Lazerowitz – attorneys at Robinson & Cole – offer practical guidance on the steps a business might consider to preserve and maximise IP value before entering financial distress or insolvency
Daniel Law CEO Alicia Daniel-Shores may have stepped into a family business, but she has spent two decades building her own vision around technology and litigation
Law firms don't particularly like saying no to clients. Perhaps they should get better at it
The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
The IP boutique is betting that growing investment in quantum and semiconductors will fuel demand as technology shifts toward physical systems
Lawyers say the overhaul better reflects commercial reality, with changes spanning novelty searches, digital designs and access to a small claims track, but stopping short of criminalising unregistered design infringement
Carpmaels & Ransford hires its fourth partner of the year and wins access to UPC files, as fresh orders address costs, confidentiality and the use of divisional patents
Gift this article