Australia: Patents Office introducing amendments to Stifle Patents

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: Patents Office introducing amendments to Stifle Patents

IP Australia is proceeding at pace with implementing the Government's response to the Productivity Commission's Report to severely curtail the rights of patent holders.

The proposed legislation and implementation is directed at the introduction of a number of problematic changes:

1) The abolition of the Innovation Patent system. The Innovation Patent system included a lower level inventiveness threshold similar to the Utility Model System of Germany, China and other countries. Allowing for lower inventiveness patents was deemed undesirable by the Productivity Commission and they recommended abolition. It is now important for applicants to seriously consider filing innovation patents before the repeal legislation is enacted.

2) Raising the inventive step requirements, somewhere in excess of the test of the European Patent Office, as a further restriction on grant. This is directed at increasing the hurdle requirement for grant.

3) Requiring applicants to disclose the "technical features" of their invention. This is an attempt to codify in legislation the European precedent of technical features. No doubt this will cause an excessive extra layer of unnecessary work for applicants.

4) Introducing an objects clause to the Patents Act 1990. Whilst the proposed clause is ephemeral, the likely subsequent discussion by patent litigants will increase the burden of litigation.

5) Making it easier to invoke the Crown Use provisions or Compulsory Licensing provisions. Again, restricting the rights of patent holders to fully exploit their patented inventions.

Whilst the Patents Office is conducting some public consultation, it is highly likely the Office will proceed with each of the above proposals.

Peter Treloar

Shelston IP

Level 21, 60 Margaret Street

Sydney NSW 2000, Australia

Tel: +61 2 9777 1111

Fax: +61 2 9241 4666

email@shelstonip.com

www.shelstonip.com

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