Local Insights

Duncan Maguire of Spoor & Fisher Jersey explains a recent ruling by the Court of Appeal of Tanzania confirming that such trademarks are unenforceable unless registered nationally with the trademarks office in Tanzania

Herman Blignaut of Spoor & Fisher South Africa addresses whether the act extends to intellectual property rights and reassures brand owners that constitutional protection remains intact

David Cochrane of Spoor & Fisher South Africa explains the key updates under the act, which strengthens breeder protections while supporting vulnerable farmers and aligning with international norms

Editha R Hechanova of Hechanova Group summarises the common issues and rewards of mediating intellectual property and other disputes in the Philippines based on her extensive experience

Gillian Tan of That.Legal explains Singapore’s approach to goodwill in passing off and what two recent cases mean for pre-launch market entry

Khin Yadanar Htay and Khin Myo Myo Aye of Tilleke & Gibbins summarise Myanmar’s new Geographical Indication Rules, covering application procedures, local representation requirements, and GI logo authorisation for domestic and international applicants

The general limitation period for juridical actions in Austria is 30 years. However, particular laws can stipulate shorter or longer limitation periods. For example, for claims in patent infringement cases, the limitation period is generally three years. This period begins from the time when knowledge of the infringement and the infringing person is obtained.

An example of an international trade mark that Austria considered for registration is Access the Inaccessible for goods and services all connected to mountaineering, climbing and work at height. This English language word mark had, among others, a designation for the UK and for Austria. In the UK, the trade mark was finally registered in spite of some difficulties. The Austrian Patent Office and the appellate court did not find it relevant that the mark was approved in the UK. Registration in a foreign country, even in a country where the relevant language is the official language spoken by the whole population, can never be binding for Austria. The reasons behind this are not only formal legal reasons (for example, territoriality), but also that the English authorities examine the trade mark from the viewpoint of English consumers while the Austrian authorities examine the same trade mark from the point of view of Austrian consumers. These perspectives might well be different since the understanding of the meaning of the foreign words might not be identical to that in a foreign country.

Paris will welcome the summer Olympic Games in 2024. This is a huge challenge for the Organising Committee.

María Aurora García of Berken IP explains how Resolution No. 583 narrows trademark examination to absolute grounds, shifting relative grounds and other objections to third-party enforcement

María Aurora García of Berken IP explains how Argentina’s evolving non-use cancellation system strengthens trademark integrity, streamlines registration, and promotes fairer market competition through efficient, partial, and administrative cancellation mechanisms

Senior patent attorneys at Licks Attorneys say recent UK court decisions on FRAND licensing conflict with Brazilian judicial sovereignty and the TRIPS framework governing the territorial independence of patents

Anne-Raphaëlle Aubry of Bird & Bird explains how Section 1782 and Rule of Procedure 190 offer different pathways for cross-border evidence gathering in European patent disputes, highlighting timing, scope, and strategic considerations for litigants

Monica Sánchez of Becerril, Coca & Becerril explains how the Mexican intellectual property framework, including compulsory licences and the Bolar clause, works alongside emerging technologies to balance pharmaceutical innovation with public health access

Carlos Hernández León of Becerril, Coca & Becerril outlines how Mexico’s shift from NAFTA-based patent term extensions to the new SPC regime affects patent holders, particularly in pharmaceuticals, and the strategic steps to secure additional protection

Raluca Vasilescu of Cabinet M Oproiu concludes a series on the use of artificial intelligence in patent practice by analysing how AI assistants affect the skilled reader’s perspective and the drafting of patent applications

Raluca Vasilescu of Cabinet M Oproiu continues a series on AI’s potential use in patent practice by analysing drafting experiments focused on differentiating from the closest prior art

In this opening article of a series, Raluca Vasilescu of Cabinet M Oproiu explains her conclusions after experimenting with various AI assistants when responding to office actions in patent applications