Report

Chapter 1 : Standard Patent System (64 submissions received)
4. Should the current re-registration system be maintained, and, if so, should the system be modified as appropriate, including
expansion to recognise the patents granted by other jurisdiction(s), and, if so, which jurisdiction(s)?
should be used but she also suggests that both the OGP and re-registration systems
should operate in parallel with each other.
Ng Chan Wai opines that Hong Kong should consider expanding the list of
designated patent offices to include USPTO, IP Australia and the Canadian patent
office.
suggests maintaining the current re-registration system without expanding
the list of designated patent offices since to a certain extent a patent system
manifests the exercise of its sovereignty by a country.
Hui Wing Kin opines that Hong Kong should consider expanding the list of
designated patent offices to include USPTO, EPO (other than designating the UK),
IP Australia, JPO and Korea Intellectual Property Office. He further suggests
recognising patents granted by any one of the ISAs and IPEAs under the PCT.
supports the retention of the re-registration system.
A respondent supports keeping the re-registration system but does not recommend
its extension to patents of other jurisdictions as that would complicate the process
with IPD having to understand and verify publication and grant dates from various
jurisdictions which may not be as clear as the current designated patent offices.
Further, in his view, avoiding this by changing from a “registration after publication
system” to a system requiring filing under Paris Convention or PCT would risk
many companies re-assessing their policy and deciding not to file in Hong Kong.
He also suggests three changes to be made: (a) to require that a request to record
under section 15 of the Patents Ordinance for a divisional application can only be
filed if a request to record the related patent application in Hong Kong has been filed
115