New Zealand: The Utility of Patent Office Guidelines for Seeking Extensions in Patent Proceedings

Once Again Called into Question: Lost in the Dark?
Last Updated: 7 July 2010
Article by Ian Finch


A recent decision of the High Court has once again cast doubt on the applicability of the Intellectual Property Office's published Guidelines for seeking extensions of time for taking steps in patent proceedings.

Bomac Research Limited v Merial Limited

In Bomac Research Limited v Merial Limited (14/4/10, Miller J, HC Wellington CIV 2009-485-2141) Merial had sought an extension of the deadline for filing its Statement of Case in a patent revocation action.

(a) The Guidelines

There were two published Guidelines which might apply:

  • The first (published in August 1999 and dealing with extensions of time generally) stated that in making a request for an extension the party applying must give full and detailed reasons for the request. The onus is on the party seeking the extension to justify it and this will require a minimum of: the reasons why it has not been possible to complete the required action within the required time (including details which demonstrate there has been no lack of diligence); the present status of the required action; what actions are outstanding and an anticipated timetable; and
  • The second (last updated 16 November 2009 and dealing specifically with extensions in patent opposition and patent revocation proceedings) provided that an applicant for extension should give full and detailed reasons why the extension is required and must convince the Commissioner that the extension is justified.

These Guidelines notwithstanding, Merial's extension application simply stated that "more time is needed". The Intellectual Property Office granted the extension after hearing from both parties and Bomac appealed to the High Court.

(b) The High Court decision

Bomac's primary contention was that, in accordance with the Guidelines and on principle, Merial should have filed reasons for the application in order to establish both that it was necessary and that Merial had not sat on its hands in respect of the initial deadline (ie it had acted diligently). In the absence of such reasons, Bomac submitted, there was no evidentiary basis on which the Commissioner could exercise his discretion to grant the extension. However the High Court rejected the submission that it was incumbent upon the applicant for an extension to prove both the need for the extension and diligence in attempting to meet the current deadline holding:

"The reasons for delay are always a relevant consideration but it is not correct that they must invariably be supplied nor that they must withstand scrutiny. An applicant fails to explain itself at its peril, but the regulations do not insist that it justify delay. Where, as in this case, the delay is short and the Statement of Case has been filed in the interim, it need not weigh heavily with the Commissioner even if not adequately explained."

As to the submission that dealing with extension applications in the absence of reasons would lead to unprincipled and inconsistent decisions from the Intellectual Property Office, and therefore leave parties in a position of uncertainty, the High Court simply added:

"It is true that they [extension applications] must be dealt with according to the interests of justice in particular circumstances and to that extent there is inevitably an element of uncertainty. But the important point is that an applicant who takes an extension for granted does so at its own risk. It would have been difficult for Merial to show that the Assistant Commissioner erred, had he refused the extension in the case."

Amadeus Global Travel Distribution SA v Sabre Inc

The Bomac decision follows an earlier judgment in the patents field which reached a very similar conclusion. In Amadeus Global Travel Distribution SA v Sabre Inc (14/3/03, Ronald Young J, HC Wellington AP126/02) Amadeus opposed Sabre's patent application in proceedings before the Commissioner. Both parties were slow in filing their Statement of Case and Counterstatement respectively. Amadeus sought an initial extension of time in which to file evidence in support of the opposition, and this was granted. A subsequent extension requested by Amadeus was refused. Amadeus sought a hearing before the Commissioner in relation to the refusal, but was unsuccessful, and appealed to the High Court.

IPONZ's August 1999 Guidelines for granting extensions of time identified typical periods of extension in patent oppositions. The Guidelines also specifically stated that outside those standard extension periods exceptional circumstances would need to exist to justify an extension. The Court expressed doubt whether the Guidelines were appropriate, as neither the Act nor the Regulations referred to "exceptional circumstances" or contained pre-ordained extension periods. The Court went on to note that the timeframes laid out in the Patents Act and Regulations were created 50 years ago and, with the complexity of modern litigation, were woefully inadequate.

Disregarding the Guidelines, the Court took the view that the decision to grant an extension must depend on the circumstances of each individual case, and that it is vital that justice is done between the parties. This includes ensuring an expeditious hearing, and the proper exchange of information. However, most importantly, the parties should be afforded every opportunity to put their best case forward. The Court also commented that if there was any delay on the part of one or both of the parties, this could be taken into account when the issue of costs is addressed at the conclusion of proceedings.

Taking all the factors into account, the Court determined that the Commissioner was wrong to have refused Amadeus an extension of time in which to complete its evidence in relation to the proceedings and granted Amadeus its extension.

The Guidelines – Of Questionable Value?

The extension application in Bomac simply stated that "more time is needed". On the basis of the concluding comments of Justice Miller, practitioners assume some risk in relying on such a brief explanation to justify all but the shortest of extensions. The position regarding longer extensions however remains uncertain given the primacy given in both Bomac and Amadeus to the interests of justice (which would always seem to favour the granting of an extension in proceedings involving a challenge to a pending or granted patent given the statutory monopoly which it will/does confer).

Of more concern is the effect of the judgments on the status of the Guidelines issued by the Intellectual Property Office. Like Ronald Young J in Amadeus, Justice Miller in Bomac ruled that the Guidelines, while no doubt useful, cannot be applied prescriptively and cannot be used to modify what is, under reg.168, an unfettered discretion. This would tend to suggest the Guidelines are of little or no value in setting a framework for the exercise of the Commissioner's discretion and/or determining whether the exercise of that discretion is justified and calls into question their utility to users of the patent system. This is particularly so now that the Commissioner seems to have dispensed with issuing "practice notes" in favour of Guidelines which have no official status.

The Outlook – Proceed With Caution

It is hoped that the situation will be remedied under the new Patents Bill (which, once enacted, will come into force in late 2012 following the drafting of Regulations), either by providing more guidance to affected parties in the Regulations themselves, or affording some official status to the Guidelines. In the meantime it appears that the Commissioner and the Courts will be guided by the merits of the application on a case by case basis, although there may be some scope to persuade the grant or refusal of an application based on precedent. Either way it would be prudent to retain the services of a practitioner with experience in patent opposition matters before embarking down this increasingly difficult path.

Ian Finch is partner in charge of James & Wells Intellectual Property's Litigation and Conflict Resolution team. He and the team have considerable experience in patent litigation, opposition and revocation actions.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

James and Wells is the 2009 New Zealand Law Awards winner of the Intellectual Property Law Award for excellence in client service.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions