Local Insights

Social media-fuelled demand for luxury counterfeits such as the ‘Takealot Tirkin’ is reshaping consumer culture across Africa and raising pressing questions for brands. Haadya Mosafeer of INLEX finds a potential answer in Mauritius’ response

Cwengile Cwele, with oversight from Chyreene Truluck of Spoor & Fisher South Africa, explains how the new process works and the implications for practitioners and rights holders

Pravir Palayathan of INLEX explains Mauritius’ customs-led system for protecting trademarks, regulating authorised importers and exporters, and swiftly seizing counterfeit goods

The Working Statement which patentees need to file every year continues to be a controversial subject. The frequent changes in the forms and varying stands of the patent office have added to the confusion.

In the midst of a pandemic that has disrupted economic activity so much so that Indonesia recently entered its first recession in over two decades, a proposed law on job creation brought thousands of protesters out to Jakarta's now almost deserted streets. The law weakens worker and environmental protections in the name of increasing business ease and underwent a somewhat unconventional and confusing path to implementation (there were four separate final drafts circulating at one point with differences of hundreds of pages). As a result, the law has been controversial from beginning to end. In its final form, it is over 1,100 pages long and amends approximately 75 separate laws, packaged together as the Job Creation Law No. 11 of Year 2020 or just the Omnibus Bill.

A recent trademark decision by the Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand (IPONZ) reveals the importance of submitting reliable and probative evidence in invalidation proceedings, even when the invalidation proceedings are undefended by the trademark owner.

A Turkish case highlights the importance of Article 138(3) when patent claims are amended during an invalidation action, say Selin Sinem Erciyas, Aysel Korkmaz Yatkın, and Bengü Şen Gürakan of Gün + Partners

Jakob Pade Frederiksen of Inspicos provides a status update on the pending case in the lead-up to oral proceedings before the EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal on May 8 2026

Igor Charles and Fatima Chirazi of INLEX report on the rejection of Decathlon’s design, unfair competition, and parasitism claims over snorkelling masks, confirming a narrow scope of protection where design freedom is constrained

Eduardo Hallak, Juliana Neves, and Gabriela Monteiro of Licks Attorneys explain how Brazilian courts have reshaped divisional patent practice and assess the practical impact of the current framework

María Aurora García of Berken IP examines how Argentine courts are using dynamic injunctions to tackle illegal sports streaming, particularly in the context of major events such as the football World Cup

Brazil is establishing itself as a hub for biological agricultural formulations. Eduardo Hallak, Rafaella Oliveira, and Gislaine Zulli of Licks Attorneys analyse a fast-developing market and a decade of related patent activity

Luis Emilio Moncada of Becerril, Coca & Becerril explains why provisional measures are an increasingly valuable mechanism under Mexican intellectual property law as the country prepares to co-host the football World Cup

Fernanda Villalobos of Becerril, Coca & Becerril explains how Mexican trademark law now allows descriptive signs to acquire protection through market use and consumer recognition

Stephania Cardiel of Becerril, Coca & Becerril examines how recent reforms signal a regional move towards faster, more internationally aligned innovation systems

Raluca Vasilescu of Cabinet M Oproiu considers how patent applicants may need to adapt their approaches as a result of widespread political and economic uncertainty

Jean-Paul Wagner and Tiago Leal of Ipsilon Luxembourg explore recent judicial advancements and global trends shaping the future of AI innovation, and how to turn informed intellectual property strategies into engines of commercial success

Raluca Vasilescu of Cabinet M Oproiu finds that AI assistants are not very helpful for building and enforcing patent strategies – and explains why