APAA e-Newsletter (Issue No. 37, October 2023)

Regulatory Void Highlighted for India’s Patent and Trademark Agents

Manisha Singh and Joginder Singh, LexOrbis (India)

The Delhi High Court recently disposed of a writ petition W.P. (C)-IPD 9/2023, revolving around a patent matter which, beyond the immediate legal dispute, highlighted a more profound issue, i.e., the regulation of professionals within the sphere of intellectual property in India. Specifically, it has brought to the fore the crucial role of patent agents in the application process involving numerous deadlines. What distinguishes the patent agents from lawyers is that they do not come under the regulatory purview of the Bar Council of India or the Advocates’ Act, 1961. This regulatory void assumes greater significance as the number of patent agents and trademark agents in India continues to increase.


This case prompts us to contemplate the international best practices in regulating patent and trademark agents, mainly drawing from the stringent measures implemented by The Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys (CIPA) in the United Kingdom (U.K.). The U.K., with its substantial investments in research and development (R&D) and high stakes in intellectual property matters, serves as an exemplary jurisdiction that places a premium on professionalism and accountability in managing patent applications and related issues.


In India, the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs, and Trademarks (CGPDTM) has borne witness to a substantial upswing in patent and trademark filings over the past five years, underscoring the imperative need for a robust regulatory framework for agents operating within this domain. This article seeks to delve deeper into the case at hand, drawing from the best practices established by CIPA in the U.K. In doing so, we aim to explore how India can adapt and learn from these practices to strengthen its regulatory framework for patent and trademark agents.


At the heart of this case is the pivotal role of patent agents. These professionals act as intermediaries between inventors and the patent office, facilitating the complex and often daunting patent application process. Their responsibilities encompass everything from drafting and filing patent applications to advising on patent strategy and prosecution. In essence, they are instrumental in helping inventors secure patent protection for their innovations. However, the fact that patent agents in India operate without the same regulatory oversight as lawyers raises some critical questions. Who holds them accountable for their actions and decisions? How can we ensure that they adhere to the highest professional standards and meet the deadlines prescribed by intellectual property laws? These questions become even more pertinent in light of the increasing importance of intellectual property in today’s business and innovation-driven world.


The United Kingdom has long recognized the significance of regulating patent agents. The CIPA, established in 1882, is a professional organization representing patent attorneys in the U.K. It sets rigorous standards for patent attorneys, ensuring they are qualified, competent, and accountable for their actions. One of the critical aspects of CIPA’s regulatory framework is the rigorous training and qualification process for patent attorneys. To become a registered patent attorney in the U.K., individuals must complete a demanding program of study and pass qualifying examinations. It ensures that patent attorneys have the knowledge and expertise to represent inventors in patent matters effectively.


Additionally, CIPA enforces a strict code of conduct that governs the professional behaviour of its members. This code includes provisions related to client confidentiality, conflicts of interest, and ethical practices. Violations of this code can result in disciplinary action, including removing an attorney’s name from the register of patent attorneys. Furthermore, CIPA plays a vital role in providing ongoing professional development and support for its members. It ensures that patent attorneys stay updated with the latest patent law and practice developments.


In India, the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs, and Trademarks (CGPDTM) has witnessed a remarkable surge in patent and trademark filings over the past five years. This surge highlights the growing importance of intellectual property in India’s economy and innovation landscape. However, this growth also underscores the urgent need for a comprehensive regulatory framework for patent and trademark agents. Without such regulation, there is a risk that unscrupulous agents could take advantage of inventors, potentially causing them to lose the protection and recognition they deserve for their innovations. The recent case in the Delhi High Court serves as a wake-up call for India’s intellectual property ecosystem. It compels us to reevaluate the regulation and supervision of trademark and patent agents. To safeguard the interests of inventors and promote innovation, India must take cues from international best practices, particularly those established by CIPA in the U.K.


To conclude, the recent case in the Delhi High Court shines a spotlight on the pressing need for a robust regulatory framework for patent and trademark agents in India. Drawing inspiration from the stringent standards and practices set by CIPA in the UK, India can chart a course toward ensuring that patent and trademark agents adhere to the highest professional standards. The pivotal role of patent agents in facilitating patent applications cannot be overstated.


As India’s intellectual property landscape continues to expand, it is essential to establish measures that guarantee professionalism, accountability, and adherence to intellectual property laws. These measures will not only protect inventors but also foster innovation and safeguard intellectual property rights in an ever-evolving technological and legal landscape. By learning from the best practices of CIPA and adapting them to the Indian context, India can bridge the regulatory gap in the intellectual property field. Doing so can create a more equitable and secure environment for inventors and innovators to thrive.