Skip to Main Content

Search

Home
Search consultations

Streamlining and simplifying IP Regulation

Closes 2 Apr 2026

This service needs cookies enabled.

Trade marks

The following questions relate to trade mark proposals where IP Australia seeks your views on an initial preferred solution.

If stakeholders support a preferred solution, IP Australia intends to progress the reform at the next available opportunity, subject to Government priorities.

1. Do you agree with introducing an examination report response system for trade marks (Proposal 3 in the paper)?

This proposal would replace the 15-month acceptance period for Trade Marks with a system where applicants are given a short period (e.g. two months) to respond to each individual exam report, thereby reducing unnecessary delays and increasing certainty in the trade mark register.

Page 9 of the consultation paper provides more information about Proposal 3.

Yes No Uncertain

Please explain the reasons for your view.

2. Do you agree with awarding costs above the schedule in trade mark oppositions (Proposal 4 in the paper)?

This proposal would provide the Registrar of Trade Marks the power to award costs above the scheduled amount for trade mark oppositions, to assist in regulating the behaviour of parties.

Page 10 of the consultation paper provides more information about Proposal 4.

Yes No Uncertain

Please explain the reasons for your view.

3. Do you agree with updating references to the Madrid Protocol, Madrid Regulations and Nice Agreement (Proposal 5 in the paper)?

This proposal would amend the trade marks legislation to allow it to refer to the Nice Agreement, Madrid Protocol and the Madrid Regulations as in force from time to time.

Page 10 of the consultation paper provides more information about Proposal 5.

Yes No Uncertain

Please explain the reasons for your view.

4. Do you agree with finalising trade mark oppositions that are not progressing (Proposal 6 in the paper)?

This proposal would give the Registrar of Trade Marks sufficient powers to finalise oppositions where both parties have abandoned the opposition and failed to participate in the last stages of the process.

Page 11 of the consultation paper provides more information about Proposal 6.

Yes No Uncertain

Please explain the reasons for your view.

5. Do you agree with correcting trade mark ownership errors (Proposal 7 in the paper)?

This proposal would empower the Registrar of Trade Marks to correct good faith ownership errors made when filing a trade mark application. This will save trade mark owners time, particularly small businesses, and avoid the cancellation of trade mark registrations.

Page 12 of the consultation paper provides more information about Proposal 7.

Yes No Uncertain

Please explain the reasons for your view.

6. Do you agree with removing the requirement for certificates of verification for trade marks (Proposal 8)?

This proposal would remove the unnecessary trade mark and design requirements for all translations of certain non-English documents to be accompanied by a certificate of verification.

Page 13 of the consultation paper provides more information about Proposal 8.

Yes No Uncertain

Please explain the reasons for your view.

Accessibility
Terms of Use
Cookies
Privacy
Help / feedback

Citizen Space from Delib

IP Australia acknowledges the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples of Australia. We acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of the lands on which our agency is located and where we conduct our business. We pay our respects to ancestors and Elders, past, present and emerging. IP Australia acknowledges Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ unique cultural and spiritual relationships to the land, waters and seas and their rich contribution to society.