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

February 14, 2018

Madrid Application Receiving Office Established in Thailand

Informed Counsel
With Thailand’s accession to the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks (Madrid Protocol) in November 2017, the Thai government is moving forward in supporting international registration of trademarks in the nation.
 
In early January 2018, the Ministry of Commerce organized an opening ceremony for its new Madrid Application Receiving Office at the Department of Intellectual Property (DIP), with the event witnessed by the Deputy Minister of Commerce, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Commerce, Director General of the DIP, and other high-ranking government officials. 
 
The office will be tasked with receiving and examining international applications using the Madrid system—inbound and outbound—and will also act as a center for disseminating knowledge about the Madrid system, including supporting brand owners in the international registrations of their trademarks.
 

Examination Guidelines

Pursuant to the Ministerial Regulation regarding the Madrid Protocol that was published in the Government Gazette on December 18, 2017, and came into force on November 7, 2017, once the DIP receives an international application from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) indicating Thailand as the designated country, the office will translate all the necessary information, such as the applicant’s name and address, the list of goods and services, etc., from English into Thai. At that point, the office will issue a domestic application number, distinct from the international application number, and proceed with the examination process.
According to section 18 of the Ministerial Regulation, the rules and procedures for Thai trademark applications will be applied to Madrid international applications. Given this fact, all the examination rules and procedures, including the interpretation of distinctiveness, examination for similarity, prohibition of marks, clarification of the specifications of goods and services, etc., will be based on local laws and practices, the same as for Thai applications.
 
If, upon examination, the office finds any irregularities in the international application that would trigger any grounds for refusal (e.g., nondistinctiveness of the mark) the office will issue a notification of provisional refusal to the applicant. To respond to the notification, the international applicant is required to appoint a local representative and provide a response within 60 days after receipt of the notification.
 
When the international application has been correctly amended and accepted, the office will publish the international application in the Thai Trademark Journal, the same as for applications filed via the national route. If a third party files an opposition against the registration of the international application, the office will not proceed with the registration of the opposed mark. At that stage, the international applicant must appoint a local representative and file a counterargument to the office within 60 days after receiving the opposition notice.
 
Timeline
 
As Thailand has adopted into law the declaration set out under Articles 5(2)(b) and (c) of the Madrid Protocol, the examination process for international applications using the Madrid system must be completed within 18 months; otherwise, the international application will automatically be deemed to be accepted for registration. However, in the case where an opposition action is raised by a third party, the office may still inform WIPO of a notification of refusal after the expiry of the 18-month time limit. In comparison, registration under the national route takes approximately 12–15 months before an applicant receives the first notification or notice of publication. 
 
It is important to note that, while the Madrid Protocol is an attractive option for foreign companies and trademark owners who seek trademark registration internationally due to the cross-border convenience in filing, renewing, and transferring rights it provides, the examination rules and procedures for international applications designating Thailand will not be less stringent.
 
Conclusion
 
Since the Madrid Protocol entered into force in Thailand, the nation has been receiving much attention from applicants in other countries seeking to register their marks in Thailand. The office has received 166 international registrations/applications designating Thailand as of January 15, 2018. Additionally, there are currently 20 international applications filed with the Thai DIP seeking IP protection in other member countries under the Madrid Protocol.  
 
These application figures are likely to increase in the near future with the removal of Thailand from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative’s Priority Watch List on December 15, 2017. Thailand is therefore likely to gain increased prominence among business owners and investors interested in expanding the protection of their brands, whether through the Madrid route or the national route. 

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

February 25, 2026
Tilleke & Gibbins has updated the Vietnam chapter in the newly released Licensing 2026 guide, published by Lexology Panoramic. The comparative guide provides companies and other interested readers with information on licensing law and practice in various countries around the world. Licensing 2026 provides detailed information on the following topics: Restrictions, laws and licensing arrangements Intellectual property issues: Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, contesting the validity of licensor’s IP rights, invalidity and expiry of IP rights, security interests, proceedings against third parties, sublicensing, jointly owned IP, first to file, scope of patent protection, trade secrets, copyright Software licensing: Perpetual licensing, legal requirements, user restrictions Royalties and payments, currency conversion, and taxes: Relevant legislation, restrictions, taxation of foreign licensors Competition law issues: Restrictions on trade, legal restrictions, and IP-related court rulings Indemnification, disclaimers, and damages: Prevalence and enforceability of indemnity provisions and contractual waivers of damages Termination: Right to terminate, impact of termination Bankruptcy: Impact of licensee or licensor bankruptcy Dispute resolution: Governing law, arbitration, enforceability, injunctive relief, contractual waivers The Vietnam chapter is available below as a PDF. Readers can gain 30 days of complementary access to the full Licensing 2026 guide and the rest of Lexology Panoramic’s varied offerings through this link.
January 30, 2026
On December 26, 2025, the government of Vietnam promulgated Decree No. 341/2025/ND-CP on administrative sanctions for violations of copyright and related rights (Decree 341), with an effective date of February 15, 2026. The new decree replaces Decree No. 131/2013/ND-CP, as amended, and represents the first comprehensive revision of the administrative enforcement framework in this area in eight years. Legislative Context and Objectives Decree 341 reflects Vietnam’s evolving copyright and related-rights framework, particularly in light of the country’s commitments under bilateral, regional, and multilateral treaties governing the digital environment. While the decree retains a number of provisions from the previous regime, it also introduces significant amendments to infringing acts, penalty thresholds, remedial measures, and enforcement procedures. The primary objectives of the new decree are to (i) enhance the deterrent effect of administrative sanctions; (ii) harmonize sanctions with the 2025 amendments to the Law on Intellectual Property and criminal law principles; and (iii) address enforcement challenges arising from online and cross-border exploitation of copyrighted works. Expanded Scope of Sanctionable Subjects Under Decree 341, administrative sanctions apply not only to Vietnamese entities committing infringing acts within Vietnam, but also to Vietnamese and foreign entities that commit acts of infringement on the internet where the protected content is accessed, consumed, or exploited by users in Vietnam. This expansion reflects the realities of cross-border digital exploitation. However, the decree does not yet provide precise definitions of key terms such as “users” or “consumers” of digital content in Vietnam, which may require further regulatory clarification. Monetary Penalties and Penalty Structure The statutory maximum fines remain unchanged, at VND 250 million for individuals and VND 500 million for organizations, but the penalty framework is substantially restructured. Fines are now calibrated based on three core criteria: (i) the amount of illegal profit obtained; (ii) the level of
January 30, 2026
Vietnam’s Intellectual Property (IP) Law, despite being amended in 2022, underwent another significant revision at the end of 2025. The latest amendment aimed to address five major policy objectives set by the Vietnamese government, including promoting innovation, digital transformation, and international integration. Among the most notable changes in the 2025 IP Law, which takes effect on 1 April 2026, is the expansion of industrial design protection under Article 4.13. The revised definition now includes partial designs and intangible designs, marking a transformative shift in Vietnam’s industrial design regime. This change has particularly significant implications on designs classified under Class 32 of the Locarno Classification—which covers graphic designs, logos, ornamentation, surface patterns, arrangements, and other intangible products. These designs, previously excluded from protection in Vietnam, are now recognized under the new legal framework. Background: Status of Class 32 Designs Before 2026 Th Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam currently applies the 13th edition of the Locarno Classification for industrial design filings. However, not all classes in this system have historically been eligible for protection. Under the 2022 IP Law, Class 32 designs were explicitly excluded based on the following legal grounds: Definition under Article 4.13 (2022 IP Law): “An industrial design is the external appearance of a product or a component for assembly into a complex product, expressed in shapes, lines, colors, or a combination thereof, and visible during the exploitation of the product’s utility or the complex product.” Product requirements under Article 21.2 of Circular 23/2023/TT-BKHCN: A product is defined as an object, a tool, a device, or means, manufactured by industrial or handicraft methods, with clear structure and function. A component for assembly into a complex product must be capable of independent circulation and detachable from the complex product. Based on these definitions, Class 32 designs, such as graphical
December 30, 2025
The Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (IP Office), with support from the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), is drafting additional annexes to its Guidelines for Patent Examination, focusing on the examination of patent applications in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors. The new annexes are expected to be officially issued in early 2026 as Annexes III and IV, following the successful issuance in 2023 of Annexes I and II addressing computer program-related inventions. The IP Office recently organized a seminar to gather feedback on the draft annexes from intellectual property representatives, academic institutions, research institutes, and other interested parties, emphasizing its intention to receive further constructive opinions to refine the guidelines for pharmaceuticals and biotechnology. Why These Guidelines Matter Patent examination in Vietnam has traditionally relied on the Guidelines for Patent Examination issued under Decision No. 487/QD-SHTT (2010), recently supplemented by Annexes I and II. While these documents provide a solid foundation, they do not fully address practical challenges in examining pharmaceutical and biotech inventions, particularly issues related to clarity, sufficiency of disclosure, enablement, features of function and utility, combination therapies, and inventions involving artificial intelligence (AI) applications in these fields. Annexes III and IV aim to close these gaps by introducing structured principles and illustrative examples. Guidance on Patent Specification Requirements Annex III provides detailed guidance on the requirements for patent specifications in pharmaceuticals and biotechnology, covering two main parts: Part A addresses sufficiency of disclosure, clarity of specifications, and consistency between claims and descriptions. Part B covers inventions related to Markush-type compounds, claims containing exclusion statements (disclaimers), and additional experimental data submitted during examination. The Guidelines outline specific disclosure requirements for subject matters such as compounds, formulations, pharmaceutical compositions, genes, polypeptides, proteins, vectors, transgenic organisms, modified organisms, and hybrid cells. Annex III emphasizes that disclaimers are not accepted