Limitations and Proposals for Improvement of Opposition Proceedings under the Thai Patent Law

Abstract

The purposes of an opposition proceeding according to Section 31 and 32 of the Patent Act B.E. 2522 (A.D. 1979) (with further amendments) and Section 32/2 of the Draft Amendment to the Patent Act which is during the legislative process is to allow third parties to participate in the examination procedure of patent applications, and on the other hand, to assure the quality of patent registration procedure. However, in Thailand, the number of oppositions is rather a small proportion of the number of patent applications. Further, the relevant provisions are ambiguous resulting in inconsistencies in the proceeding. Thus, the Thai patent law relating to the opposition proceeding should be reviewed whether it is still appropriate in the context of present-day Thailand.

With the comparison of the Thai opposition proceeding with the opposition proceeding according to the patent law of Australia, Japan, United States, India, and Singapore, which are countries selected to represent each model of the opposition together with the analysis of decisions of the Director General of the Department of Intellectual Property and the Board of Patents, statistic data, and interview data, it is found that the current provisions hinder both parties’ processes and the draft provisions also cause issues that deviate the proceeding from its major purposes. In addition, the law lacks clarity for parties’ and officials’ actions in the proceeding.

Therefore, this article proposes that Thailand amends its patent law, i.e., provisions relating to the opposition proceeding to alleviate limitations that put either party at a disadvantage and cause difficulties in the proceeding so that the purposes of the proceeding can be achieved. As a consequence, the provisions can help promote innovation and disclosure of such to the public for sustainable development.