You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

April 14, 2017

IP Linkage: The Thai Government’s Efforts to Connect Agencies

Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

On February 24, 2017, Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha spoke to the nation and discussed the 12,000+ patent applications before the Thai Patent Office that are currently being processed and awaiting final decision on whether they will be granted. With Thailand having one of the world’s longest patent pendency periods, the Prime Minister noted that this matter must be addressed urgently.

Currently, local Thai and foreign patent applicants are awaiting the announcement of a government order that is expected to introduce a modified examination process for qualifying applications. This is not the first time the Prime Minister has affirmed the government’s policy to strengthen intellectual property (IP) protection and enforcement in Thailand. 

Just last year, the Suppression of Intellectual Property Infringement Subcommittee was set up to resolve issues related to preventing IP infringement, reduce problems for IP rights holders, increase IP protection in accordance with international standards, and improve Thailand’s image as an IP-friendly country (a particularly important undertaking, as Thailand has been listed on the U.S. Trade Representative’s Priority Watch List for the past nine years for providing insufficient IP protection).

The agencies that are part of the Subcommittee include the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and 15 other government agencies. Their inclusion in the Subcommittee is a clear indication that the Government has recognized the importance of linkage between intergovernmental agencies whose work touches on IP. The next agency to be added to the Subcommittee should be the Ministry of Agriculture, in order to ensure that agricultural inputs, animal health, and new plant variations are adequately protected.

Intellectual property linkage refers to connecting an IP office, through open communication lines and complementary processes, to other government agencies that work on IP. This generally includes agencies tasked with regulating food, drugs, and agricultural products, in order to ensure not only that there is proper communication between the officials of both agencies, but also that each agency’s regulations are in line with one another, and the agencies do not promulgate conflicting requirements. IP linkage is also useful in suppressing IP infringement, especially when health regulators work closely with IP offices.

On March 8, the Government held a meeting to discuss its plan to clear the longstanding patent backlog. The inclusion of various government agencies and private associations including the FDA, the Department of Intellectual Property (DIP), the National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA), the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association (PReMA), the Intellectual Property Association of Thailand (IPAT), Fair Trade Area Watch (FTA Watch), and the Thai Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association (TPMA) is a clear sign of the government’s intention to connect various interested parties together in order to address Thailand’s patent pendency problem.        

There are many examples of IP linkage around the world. For instance, the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center (IPR Center) in the United States is composed of 23 partner agencies, of which 19 are federal agencies and 4 are foreign agencies (Interpol, Europol, and the Canadian and Mexican governments). The IPR Center is structured as a cohesive task force, in order to allow resources and skills to be pooled and leveraged, and to foster the sharing of information. A similar body has been created in the Philippines.

There is also a patent linkage system in the United States. When filing a New Drug Application with the U.S. FDA, an applicant must list any patents that cover the drug. The U.S. FDA will take these existing patents into consideration when reviewing the application, and if a patent exists, marketing approval will not be granted to a generic applicant unless and until the patent expires or is found invalid.

In the European Union, the EU Agencies Network is comprised of various agencies across EU member states, including the EU Intellectual Property Office. It promotes the sharing of information and expertise among these agencies. While the EU does not have a patent linkage system in place, generic drugs are still not allowed to be placed on the market until an existing patent expires.

Thailand can look to Singapore, its regional neighbor, for guidance on moving forward. After entering into a free trade agreement with the United States, Singapore introduced patent linkage as one of the requirements in an application for marketing approval. This system allows patent owners to monitor for potential infringement before generic drugs are launched by providing a framework that warns a patent owner any time a competitor’s application is submitted to market the same drug.

Thailand has begun to provide linkage between the DIP and the Thai FDA, but the system is in a very undeveloped stage. Since 2008, the Thai FDA has imposed a requirement on all applicants that are applying for a new drug to fill out a form listing all of their existing patents. While this is a step in the right direction, this type of mandatory disclosure should be enforced on applications for generic drugs, as infringement is most likely to occur with such drugs.

The Thai government’s recent efforts to connect the various ministries and agencies whose work touches on IP is an important step in addressing many of the issues long identified as obstacles to further encouragement of Thai innovation and value creation.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 6, 2024
Addressing technical barriers to trade is a key priority for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as part of trade facilitation in achieving the single market and production base under the ASEAN Economic Community directive agreed in 2015. The region has been undertaking positive steps toward standard harmonization in ASEAN priority sectors, integrating and bringing about regulatory convergence by taking into account the diversities that exist in the ten ASEAN member states. Health supplements in ASEAN are under the responsibility of the Traditional Medicine and Health Supplement Product Working Group (TMHS PWG). One of the TMHS PWG’s outputs is the ASEAN Agreement on a Regulatory Framework for Health Supplements, which includes various technical requirements for health supplements that participating member states must adopt by adjusting their domestic regulations. The key ingredients of these health supplements are vitamins and minerals. While all ASEAN countries allow the use of vitamins and minerals in health supplements, the amounts allowed for use vary, depending on the nutritional requirements deemed appropriate by each country. Partly in response to these efforts for regional harmonization, there have been important changes to vitamin and mineral limits in certain ASEAN countries that are worth monitoring. Some of these are outlined below. Thailand In January 2024, the Thai Food and Drug Administration (TFDA) updated the Thai Recommended Daily Intake (Thai RDI) guidelines for the Thai population. Subsequently, the TFDA adjusted the vitamin and mineral limits in order to comply with the updated Thai RDI and to follow the ASEAN Agreement on a Regulatory Framework for Health Supplements. The TFDA’s adjustment of vitamin and mineral limits for use in food supplements came in Notification of the Ministry of Public Health (No. 448) B.E. 2566 (2023) Re: Food Supplements (No. 5), which was published in the Government Gazette on January
August 8, 2024
On July 19, 2024, Thailand’s Ministry of Public Health Notification No. 450 B.E.2567 (2024) came into effect after being published in the Government Gazette the day before. The notification introduces significant updates to the labeling requirements for prepackaged foods. This new regulation consolidates and updates Thailand’s rules for food labeling by repealing and replacing several previous notifications. The notification’s key changes and their implications for food businesses are identified below. 1. Clarified “Best Before” Definition The notification aligns the definition of “best before” with Codex standards. It now refers to the date marking the end of the period during which the food maintains its best quality under stated storage conditions. After this date, food quality may change, and the product cannot be marketed. 2. Updated Labeling Exceptions Certain foods are exempt from labeling requirements, with the latest list including: Foods sold directly to consumers by manufacturers who can provide product information. Unprocessed foods. Some fresh foods not sold directly to consumers. Prepackaged foods produced and sold for immediate consumption in food service settings. However, any of these exempt foods that have received food serial numbers must still have labels that comply with the notification. 3. Expiration Date and Best-Before Date Display The notification provides clearer language for displaying the expiration date and best-before date. If specific wording is required by other notifications, it must be followed. English equivalents are now permitted alongside Thai text. 4. Warning Displays Multiple applicable warnings can now be consolidated and displayed together, provided the complete message is included as specified. 5. Claims about Substances or Ingredients New guidelines have been established for making claims about food additives and ingredients. Claims should be factual, not deceptive, and provably not false. 6. Label Placement and Design Labels must be permanently affixed, proportionate to the packaging, and
August 8, 2024
Tilleke & Gibbins has contributed the Thailand chapter to the 2024 edition of Pharmaceutical Advertising from the International Comparative Legal Guides (ICLG) series published by Global Legal Group. This detailed guide offers an in-depth examination of pharmaceutical advertising laws and regulations in multiple jurisdictions around the globe. Each chapter of the guide, structured in a Q&A format, is organized into comprehensive sections covering various aspects of pharmaceutical advertising, including: General rules and codes of practice governing pharmaceutical advertising Required arrangements for ensuring compliance with advertising regulations Procedures for obtaining advertising approvals from regulatory authorities Penalties for non-compliance with advertising rules Guidelines for providing information prior to product authorization Requirements for advertisements directed at healthcare professionals Restrictions on the content of pharmaceutical advertisements The complete Thailand chapter is available as a PDF below. The Thailand chapter—and the full Pharmaceutical Advertising guide—are also freely available on the ICLG website.
July 31, 2024
On July 18. 2024, Vietnam’s Ministry of Health issued Circular No. 12/2024/TT-BYT promulgating National Technical Regulation QCVN 20-1:2024/BYT on the limits of contaminants for health supplements (“Circular 12”). The new national technical regulation is the very first relating to health supplements, and is expected to have a great impact on the control of health supplement quality in Vietnam. Circular 12 will take effect on August 1, 2025. Contents of Circular 12 The new circular prescribes limits of contaminants (heavy metals and microorganisms), testing samples and testing methods, management requirements, and responsibilities of entities manufacturing and trading in health supplements. Supplemented alcohol products which are declared as health supplements are notably excluded from the scope of the regulation. Transitional Provisions Health supplements which (i) have been granted a declaration registration certificate, and (ii) are manufactured before August 1, 2025, are allowed to continue to be imported, traded, and circulated until the expiry date of the product, even if it is not aligned with Circular 12, except when there is food safety warning. Declaration registration dossiers for health supplements submitted before August 1, 2025, will continue to be handled in accordance with the prevailing regulations at the time of submission. From August 1, 2025, if a health supplement with a granted declaration registration certificate has a manufacturer’s standard that does not comply with Circular 12, the party manufacturing/trading in the product must adjust the product standard to conform to Circular 12 and notify the authority of this adjustment.