Brief Report on an online exchange program between ‘JPO and O/o. CGPDTM’ on Trademark Opposition Systems in India and Japan

The Office of CGPDTM and the Japan Patent Office (JPO) conducted an online exchange program on Trademark Opposition Systems in India and Japan on March 10, 2025, from 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. (IST).

The Official from O/o CGPDTM discussed the Opposition and Rectification procedures under Trademarks Act, 1999. She explained that opposition can be filed within four months of advertisement under Section 21, and rectification after registration. She detailed the process involving notice of opposition, counterstatement, evidentiary affidavits (Rules 43–48), and hearings under Rule 50. Both parties must follow strict timelines or risk abandonment of opposition or application. The registrar’s decision post-hearing is communicated to parties and is appealable before High Courts. The grounds for opposition include absolute, relative, infringement, and passing off. Evidence is submitted through affidavits, and representation is mandatory throughout the process.

The Official from JPO presented Japan’s trademark opposition, invalidation, and rescission procedures. He explained that opposition can be filed within two months post-publication under Trademark Act §43-2 to 43-15. In 2023, 488 cases were disposed of, with 41 revocations. Proceedings are mainly documentary and handled by an administrative panel. Trials for invalidation, filed by interested parties, can occur anytime and are generally oral. The shift from pre-grant to post-grant opposition in 1997 aimed at expediting rights due to shorter product life cycles. In 2023, 95 invalidation requests were filed, with 19 resulting in revocation. Decisions can be appealed to the IP High Court.

During the discussion, Indian and Japanese delegates exchanged queries on opposition procedures. Japan asked about virtual hearings and cancellations in India. India noted 25–27% opposition rate. India inquired about appeal rights and opposition timelines, learning only right holders can appeal in Japan. Japan reported a decline in opposition cases post-1997.

Way Forward:

• The Office may accord more such sessions with foreign IP Offices to delve deeper into topics of trademark systems.
• Assistance in preparing draft Trademarks manual/guidelines.
• Exploring opportunities for joint events to further strengthen bilateral cooperation in trademark registration.