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

To raise funds for research and development, start-ups sometimes have to announce the existence of licensing agreements, supply and distribution agreements etc. (i.e. a contract for a future sale of a product embodying an invention). In places like the US, if such agreements were made public more than one year prior to the effective filing date, even though the details of the invention are kept confidential, a statutory on-sale bar may be triggered, resulting in loss of patent protection for the invention in the US.

When inventions/designs are disclosed to the public by one of the inventors/designers or applicants, a one year grace period is available in Korea for patent, utility model, and design applications.

In 2015, the Korean Supreme Court cleared the patent eligibility hurdle for dosage regimen inventions, and announced that dosage regimens are patentable if they satisfy other patentability requirements including novelty and inventiveness (Supreme Court en banc decision 2014Hu768, May 21 2015). In the first case where the inventiveness of a dosage invention was at issue (Patent Court decision 2015Heo7889, February 3 2017), the Korean Patent Court denied inventiveness on the ground that optimising dosage regimens to achieve the reduction of toxicity or improvement of efficacy is considered routine experimentation or work of a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA). This shows that Korea has a strict standard for the inventiveness of dosage regimen patents.

Igor Charles and Franck Soutoul of Inlex examine a Paris Court of Appeal ruling that fully invalidated a ‘Richard Mille’ trademark for fraud despite limits on protection based on reputation

Marco Stief of Maiwald argues that the District Court of The Hague missed an opportunity to clarify the uncertainty surrounding the term ‘first authorisation’ in Article 3(d) of the SPC Regulation in a recent judgment

The ruling addresses the impact of device mark differences, proof of use, and well-known status arguments, say Hande Hançar Koç, Havva Yıldız, and Zeynep Berfin Ekinci of Gün and Partners

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