Search

The article focuses on the impact of changes to Singapore's patent law related to the pharmaceutical industry. Before amendment of the Singapore Patents Act 1995 on July 1, 2004, patents relating to pharmaceutical products were not given any special treatment under Singapore law. The situation for pharmaceutical patents changed with the amendments to the Act, which introduced a number of specific provisions with respect to the protection of pharmaceutical products. The possibility of a patent term extension was introduced in the Singapore Patents Act on July 1, 2004.

This article reports that Singapore's government has reformed the country's patent code to bring it in line with its international obligations. Kristian Robinson of ECSF, in Singapore, explains the how the reforms will help patent holders. The Patents Act 2004 sets out significant changes to formal aspects of patent prosecution as well as the approach to patents post-grant. The changes are the result of a review of certain aspects of Singaporean patent practice since the Patent Acts came into force in 1995 and Singapore's commitments under the U.S.-Singapore free-trade agreement. Priority documents of any sort are no longer required, unless specifically requested by the Singapore Patent Office.

The article presents information related to Singapore's Human Cloning and Other Prohibited Practices Act which came into force October 1, 2004.

The article reports that Singapore has accepted the amendments to the TRIPs Agreement and has proposed amendments to the Singapore Patents Act to conform the TRIPs Agreement. The General Council of the World Trade Organization agreed in 2003 to waive the requirements of Article 31 (f) of the TRIPs Agreement, in order to facilitate the import of pharmaceutical drugs to countries with no or insufficient manufacturing capacity.

The article focuses on the issue of including an unsupported disclaimer (UD) in a Singapore patent application. It states that there is no case law in Singapore on whether a disclaimer, which does not have basis in the filed application, would constitute added subject matter when introduced into a patent claim and therefore be unallowable. However, recent decisions by the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office have set out certain criteria for assessing the allowability of an UD.

The article reports on the proposal of a PCT national phase track for national phase entry applications in Singapore. The proposed track entails revisions to existing search and examination timelines and grant fee deadlines for these patent applications. Under the current procedures for search and examination of national phase entry applications in Singapore, there are two possible routes of examination, namely the default fast track route and the optional slow track route. The proposed PCT national phase track applies only to national phase entry applications and not to direct filings in Singapore. The proposed PCT national phase track is targeted to come into effect on October 1, 2006.

According to Section 30 (3) (a) of the Singapore Patents Act, the Registrar of Patents has the power to refuse the grant of a patent in pursuance of more than one application, where one applicant files two or more applications for a patent for the same invention, which have the same priority date (the so called double patenting exclusion). In Singapore, grant of a patent will occur once the applicant pays the official grant fee, irrespective of whether the patent application has undergone examination. No explicit provision exists under the Singapore Patents Act.

The article reports on the launch of a patent prosecution highway (PPH) pilot programme by Singapore with the State Intellectual Property Office of the People's Republic of China (SIPO). The program will allow both offices to share their search and examination results and avoid the need for duplicate examination work. It is noted that Singapore applications that request entry into the PPH programme will be processed in accordance with the Singapore Patents Act and the Singapore Patents Rules.

The article discusses a Patents Amendment Bill in Singapore as of December 2012, focusing on the hiring of patent examiners by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore and the transition from a self-assessment to positive grant system in Singapore patent law.

The article explains the aspect of Singapore patent law pertaining to the definition of a "priority" relationship between a patent application filed in Singapore and a corresponding application or applications filed in certain other jurisdictions.

The article reports that the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) gave clarification on the issue of second medical use claim practice in Singapore, which does not corresponds to the newly minted Section 4A(4) of Great Britain Patents Act. It mentions that applicants looking for protection for new and further medical uses of a composition or substance, should do so through second medical use claims, formulated in the Swizz format.