S.S.Rana-IPR-Law-Firm
ssrana-facebook   ssrana-twitter   ssrana-googleplus   ssrana-linkedin   ssrana-googleblog
Client Login
  Skip Navigation Links  
 














   













STATEMENT AND UNDERTAKING UNDER SECTION 8

 

INDIAN IP LAWS

  PATENTS
 
Patent Search
Patent Drafting
Patent Applications
Patent Filing
Patent Procedure
Patent Flowchart
Patent Opposition
Patent Annuity Payments
Working of Patented Inventions
Revocation of Patent
Compulsory Licensing
Patent Filing Fees, Cost & Forms
Patent Infringement
Patent Act India
Patent FAQ India
PCT Application
PCT Search
PCT International Filing
PCT Filing Procedure India
Indian Patent Office - ISA
PCT FAQ India
Section 8 & Rule 12
Patent Litigation
Foreign Filing License
TRADEMARKS
DESIGNS
COPYRIGHT
DOMAIN NAMES
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS
ANTI-COUNTERFEITING
IP ENFORCEMENT AND LITIGATION
INFRINGEMENT & PASSING OFF OF TRADEMARK
FRANCHISING LAW
MADRID PROTOCOL

SAARC IP LAWS

INTERNATIONAL IP LAWS

USEFUL LINKS

 

 

Section 8 of Indian Patents Act deals with information and undertaking regarding foreign applications.

 

Is it mandatory to file Form-3 under section 8 in India for a Patent Application?  

What are the consequences of non-compliance section 8 in India? 

 

The requirement of the disclosure on Form 3 in the form of statement and undertaking under the Indian Patent Act is governed by Section 8 of the Indian Patents Act.

Under Section 8(1) of the Indian Patents Act, applicant for the patent has to provide a statement disclosing the detailed particulars of application(s) filed outside India corresponding to its Indian patent application. According to the Clause (b) of this section the applicant provides an undertaking that he would keep the controller updated about the progress of applications filed elsewhere in the world relating to the same or substantially the same invention upto the grant of patent in India. The time within which the applicant has keep the Controller informed regarding the aforesaid details is six months from the date of such filing.


In addition, Section 8(2) states that the applicant must furnish the Controller with details of the processing of applications filed elsewhere in the world if and when the Controller requests such updates.


Non-Compliance of Section 8 i.e. if applicant fails to disclose or furnishes false information, is one of the grounds of pre-grant opposition or post grant opposition under Section 25, and subsequent revocation of patent under section 64(1)(m) of the Indian Patents Act.


The authoritative/landmark judgments wherein the Non- Compliance of the Section 8 of the Indian Patents Act rendered patent vulnerable to revocation includes: Chemtura Corporation vs Union Of India CS(OS) No. 930 of 2009), Tata Chemicals Limited vs Hindustan Unilever Limited (M.P. NO.73 OF 2011, M.P. NO.7 OF 2012, M.P. No.16/2012 AND M.P. NO.22 OF 2012 IN ORA/18/2010/PT/MUM ANDORA/18/2010/PT/MUM)


Relevant links:

For more details on the case Tata Chemicals Limited vs Hindustan Unilever Limited, please click here

Tata Chemicals Limited vs Hindustan Unilever Limited judgement

 

However, in a recent judgement “Sukesh Behl v/s Koninklijke Phillips Electronics (FAO(OS) No.16 OF 2014)”, the Delhi High Court has ruled that patentee’s non-compliance with section 8 of the Indian Patents Act, 1970 will not automatically revoke the patent u/s 64(1) (m). The fact that the word “may” is used in Section 64(1) itself indicates the intention of the legislature that the power conferred thereunder is discretionary.

 

Relevant links:

For more details on the case Sukesh Behl v/s Phillips Electronics, please click here

 

For more information on Section 8 & Rule 12 of Indian Patent Act please write to us at: info@ssrana.com

  |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |  


© Copyright 2010-17, S.S. Rana & Co. All rights reserved