AustLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Edited Legal Collections Data

You are here:  AustLII >> Databases >> Edited Legal Collections Data >> 2014 >> [2014] ELECD 673

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Articles | Noteup | LawCite | Help

Luginbuehl, Stefan --- "CONFIDENTIALITY EXAMINATION" [2014] ELECD 673; in Luginbuehl, Stefan; Ganea, Peter (eds), "Patent Law in Greater China" (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2014) 188

Book Title: Patent Law in Greater China

Editor(s): Luginbuehl, Stefan; Ganea, Peter

Publisher: Edward Elgar Publishing

ISBN (hard cover): 9781781954836

Section: Chapter 11

Section Title: CONFIDENTIALITY EXAMINATION

Author(s): Luginbuehl, Stefan

Number of pages: 5

Abstract/Description:

The revised Patent Act introduced in 2009 the so-called ‘confidentiality examination’ for any inventions made in China (including Hong Kong and Macau) and for which patent protection is sought outside of China. The confidentiality examination consists of a mandatory screening and disclosure of the inventions made in China to SIPO and other related ministries for each relevant technology sector. It thus aims at examining which technologies are researched in China and who applies for patents. Furthermore, it avoids an uncontrolled outflow of inventions made in China. A request for confidentiality examination has to be filed with SIPO prior to filing an application abroad. If the applicant does not file a request for a confidentiality examination and directly applies for a patent outside of China in relation to an invention made in China, no patent will be granted to the applicant for the territory of China, as any subsequent patent application in China will be refused on the grounds of lack of patentability. Furthermore, third parties can invoke non-compliance with this procedure as a ground for invalidation, and administrative and criminal proceedings may be initiated. The fact that confidentiality examination would have shown the applicant to be perfectly entitled to have filed a patent application abroad is irrelevant. No remedy is granted in the law for accidental oversight. If an invention is qualified as important for national security or other vital state interests, filing a patent application abroad in relation to such invention will be prohibited.


AustLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/ELECD/2014/673.html