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​ 

December 17, 2025
Vietnam’s National Assembly approved wide-ranging amendments to the Intellectual Property (IP) Law on December 10, 2025, marking one of the most significant overhauls of the country’s IP regime in recent years. The changes, which supplement and refine existing provisions, are designed to align Vietnam’s framework more closely with international standards while addressing practical challenges faced by rights holders and practitioners. The amendments will come into force on April 1, 2026. The most notable changes are detailed below. Recognition of partial and nonphysical industrial designs: Industrial design protection has been broadened to cover partial designs and nonphysical forms (class 32), explicitly extending rights to parts of products that are not independently circulated as well as digital and intangible product appearances. The law clarifies that the external appearances of nonphysical products are protected industrial designs, and circulation of digital copies of any part of that appearance will be treated as an act of using the industrial design. The provision on the industrial applicability of industrial designs has also been amended accordingly to include the uniform reproduction of nonphysical products in cyberspace. Resolving conflicts between overlapping rights: The IP Law provides a safeguard against conflicts when a single subject matter is protected by multiple IP rights. Where overlapping rights exist, the later-arising right will be terminated if its exercise interferes with the normal exploitation of an earlier right. The decision to terminate such a later right rests with the court. Use of published data for AI training: Organizations and individuals may use lawfully published and publicly accessible documents and data for scientific research, testing, and AI system training. Such use must not unreasonably prejudice the rights or legitimate interests of authors or IP rights holders. Where the documents and data fall under copyright or related rights protection, their use must also comply
December 5, 2025
One morning, a California-based company mapping its Southeast Asia rollout opened an unexpected cease-and-desist letter from a Vietnamese IP firm. To the company’s surprise, the letter asserted that a local client already owned the company’s brand in Vietnam and threatened legal action. This is not an isolated incident. In another recent matter in the sports industry, a squatter demanded at least USD 48,000 from our client to “resolve” a similar conflict. For brands entering Vietnam or expanding distribution there, these tactics can create acute risk at precisely the point at which market momentum is building. Vietnam’s rapid economic growth and deepening integration into global trade have made it an increasingly attractive destination for multinational brands. Those same dynamics have intensified a longstanding issue: trademark squatting. Vietnam has modernized its IP framework over the past decade, but its strict first-to-file trademark system continues to incentivize opportunistic filings by parties with no legitimate interest in a mark. As more foreign brands build their reputation abroad before turning to Vietnam, squatters remain alert to timing gaps and enforcement frictions. The First-to-File System: Advantages and Vulnerabilities Vietnam adheres closely to the first-to-file principle under its Law on Intellectual Property. In practice, exclusive trademark rights belong to whoever submits the earliest valid application to the Vietnam Intellectual Property Office, regardless of prior use in Vietnam. This approach offers administrative clarity and reduces evidentiary burdens compared to use-based jurisdictions. Yet it also creates fertile conditions for squatting. Bad-faith actors regularly monitor foreign markets, identify brands gaining traction, and move quickly to register those marks domestically, often long before the genuine owner enters the market or prioritizes local filings. By the time the true brand seeks protection, the squatter’s application (or registration) stands as a legal obstacle, pushing businesses toward costly oppositions, cancellations, or uncomfortable negotiations
November 26, 2025
On November 21, 2025, Myanmar’s Ministry of Commerce (MOC) issued Notification No. 103/2025 promulgating the Geographical Indication Rules (GI Rules), establishing a comprehensive framework for the registration and administration of geographical indications (GI), which are primarily governed by the Trademark Law of 2019. On the same day, the MOC released Notification No. 104/2025 specifying the required forms for GI-related matters. The GI Rules establish a comprehensive set of procedures for the entire GI application process, including filing applications, oppositions, cancellations, and invalidations, and appointing a local representative for GI-related matters. Under the Trademark Law and the GI Rules, domestic and foreign legal entities (organizations) that formally represent a defined group of stakeholders (such as producers or manufacturers of natural products or resources, agricultural products, handicrafts, or industrial products) and other competent authorities from government departments are eligible to apply for GI registration with the Intellectual Property Department (IPD) in Myanmar. Application A GI application can be submitted in either English or Myanmar language electronically, in person, or via post. Foreign applicants seeking to register a GI in Myanmar are required to submit a copy of the registration certificate from their country of origin with the GI application. This certificate must explicitly state the GI name of the protected product. Notably, foreign applicants are mandated to appoint a local representative in Myanmar to act on their behalf for GI-related matters with the IPD and appeal-related matters with the IP Agency. The form for appointing the local representative must be duly notarized in the applicant’s home country to ensure its legal validity and acceptance in accordance with the GI Rules. Application for Use of GI Logo Pursuant to the GI Rules, any interested individual, local or foreign, may submit an application to the IPD for authorization to use the GI logo,
November 21, 2025
Tilleke & Gibbins has contributed the Thailand chapter to Asia IP’s ASEAN Guide to IP Protection 2025, an annual reference covering key developments and practical considerations for intellectual property systems across Southeast Asia. The chapter offers an overview of Thailand’s current legal framework for the protection of trademarks, patents, industrial designs, and copyrights. It summarizes registration requirements, recent regulatory updates, and procedural considerations relevant to rights holders and practitioners. The chapter offers actionable insights for rights holders at every stage of the IP lifecycle and addresses practical strategies for managing portfolios, anticipating enforcement challenges, and maximizing the value of IP assets. The authors also highlight recent trends and developments in Thai IP law, ensuring that readers are equipped with the latest knowledge to inform their decisions. The complete Thailand chapter can be downloaded through the button below, and the chapter is also available on the Asia IP website.