IPOS consults on proposed changes to intellectual property regime

7 November 2025

On 15 October 2025, the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (“IPOS”) issued a public consultation paper seeking feedback on proposed changes to certain areas of the intellectual property regime (“Consultation Paper”). On 21 October 2025, IPOS extended the deadline for responses from 11 November 2025 to 25 November 2025.

This article sets out an overview of the proposed amendments to aspects of Singapore’s intellectual property (“IP”) regime.

Patents

Formalising request for basis for amendments

IPOS proposes to require applicants to provide basis for amendments made to the specification of a patent or patent application in order to assist Examiners in determining if the amendments add matter extending beyond that disclosed in the application as filed; for granted patents, amendments must not extend the protection conferred. This proposal would formalise the current practice under which applicants are encouraged, but not required, to provide such basis to facilitate examination.

Clarifying ambit of section 68(1) Patents Act 1994

Section 68 of the Patents Act 1994 provides a rebuttable presumption that a product is made by a patented process in at least one of the following scenarios: (i) the product is new (“New Product Scenario”); and (ii) substantial likelihood exists that the product is made by the process and the proprietor of the patent has been unable through reasonable efforts to determine the process actually used (“Substantial Likelihood Scenario”). IPOS proposes to amend the wording of section 68(1) which states, “where the subject matter of the patent is a process for obtaining a new product”, which may be read as limiting the rebuttable presumption to the New Product Scenario, by removing the word “new” to clarify that the presumption applies equally to both scenarios.

Trade marks

Final Examination Report

IPOS proposes to introduce a Final Examination Report (“FER”) to improve efficiency in trade mark examinations. Currently, applications can be delayed when applicants repeatedly submit the same arguments after objections are raised. Under the new proposal, IPOS would issue an FER when further submissions are repetitive or when a mark is clearly non-registrable. Applicants would then have four months to either amend or withdraw the application, or request an ex parte hearing, with a one-time three-month extension available. If no action is taken, the application would be treated as withdrawn in respect of the objectionable goods/services, though continued processing may still be requested within two months. This change aims to streamline the examination process and provide greater certainty for applicants and examiners.

Hearings and mediation

Alignment of geographical indications procedures and appeal rights

IPOS proposes to align timelines relating to geographical indications (“GIs”) procedures with those applicable to trade mark proceedings, and to also extend the right of appeal to the General Division of the High Court to Registrar’s decisions in interlocutory decisions that effectively dispose of a matter concerning or application for a GI. The proposed timeframes are set out in the Consultation Paper. This amendment would promote consistency across regimes and ensure parity of procedural rights.

Requests for extensions of time

IPOS proposes to amend the law in respect of trade marks and GIs to clarify that the concept of “irregularity in procedure” will encompass time-related matters, but expressly excluding time limits for filing a notice of opposition or objection, counter-statement, and evidence from the scope of that provision. The proposal further provides for the Registrar’s power to award costs to the innocent party to be explicitly recognised, without requiring a prior interlocutory hearing.

Scale of costs

IPOS proposes to revise and standardise cost scales across all IP regimes. The updated scales will reflect rounded figures and modest increases. In particular, a slightly larger increase is proposed for initiating actions and attending hearings, to recognise that more costs are incurred in practice. The Registrar will additionally have the discretion to award off-scale costs after hearing both parties, including in circumstances where conduct has been unreasonable or undesirable.

Cross-IP proposals

IPOS proposes two cross-regime procedural changes. First, applications filed on Sundays or public holidays would be accorded the same-day filing date, rather than that of the next working day, aligning Singapore with other major IP offices and helping applicants secure earlier priority while leaving time limits expiring on those days unaffected. Second, IPOS proposes to allow the Registrar to extend deadlines only in “circumstances beyond the control of party concerned” and, remove the “other special circumstances” ground as the wording of the former is already sufficiently broad.

Reference materials

The Consultation Paper is available on the IPOS website www.ipos.gov.sg by clicking here.