Patent Litigation 2026 Comparisons

Inventions are protected through multiple intellectual property domains in Pakistan. The primary protection is provided through patents under the Patents Ordinance, 2000, which covers technical inventions relating to products and processes.

In addition, certain aspects of inventions may be protected through other IP regimes, such as trade secrets and confidential information, which are enforced through contractual arrangements and principles recognised by courts.

It is pertinent to note that in Pakistan, protection for minor innovations is not currently available under the utility model; however, they are treated under the Patents Ordinance, 2000, and the Patents Rules, 2003.

Please note that a uniform procedure is adopted for the grant of an invention under the Patents Ordinance, 2000 irrespective of whether that invention is a product or a process.

To obtain a patent, an application must be filed along with the prescribed fees. The Patent Office, in accordance with the Patents Ordinance, 2000, and the Patents Rules, 2003, examines the application for patentability, assessing whether the invention is novel, involves an inventive step and is capable of industrial application. Upon successful examination, the application is accepted and advertised in the Gazette of Pakistan for inviting of opposition by any person. If no opposition is filed within four months of its publication/advertisement, the grant of the accepted application proceeds upon submission of the prescribed request and fee. The patent will then be sealed and a letter patent issued to the patentee.

The grant procedure timeline varies as it depends on many factors, including but not limited to the workload of the examiners, the number of examination reports issued by the office and the time taken by the applicant to submit the reply to the office actions; however, the average grant time and cost are three years, subject to no objection being filed, and PKR20,000 to PKR25,000

It should be noted that professional charges for the prosecution of each intellectual property right will vary from attorney to attorney. An inventor is not required to be represented by an agent to initiate grant proceedings but engaging one is advisable for effective prosecution, as they are well-versed in the applicable law and procedures under the jurisdiction of Pakistan, which ensures smoother and more efficient processing.

The term of intellectual property rights in relation to patents/inventions is 20 years, subject to renewal each year; the renewal payment is not applicable in the first four years from the filing date or priority date.

Rights Conferred by Patent

The holder of a valid patent has the exclusive right to prevent unauthorised parties from making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing the patented product, or, where the patent relates to a process, from using the process and products directly obtained from it.

The patent owner may assign or license the patent and may initiate legal proceedings against infringement. In the event of infringement, the patentee may seek civil remedies before an IP Tribunal, including:

• temporary and permanent injunctions;
• damages or account of profits; and/or
• destruction of infringing goods.

Patentee Obligation

The patent owner is required to pay annual renewal (annuity) fees to keep the patent in force and must also work the patented invention in Pakistan, failing which it may be exposed to compulsory licensing by the federal government or possible revocation. It is pertinent to note that non-payment of renewal fees results in lapse of the patent. A patent shall cease to have effect if the prescribed renewal fee is not paid within the stipulated period.

Patent information is available through the Patent Office’s patent records, or the gazette of Pakistan Part (v), in which filed and accepted patent applications are published. However, product-specific mapping must be done independently through patent searches and legal analysis by patent attorneys.

Patent Linkage

A patent linkage system that connects drug marketing approval from the Drug Regulatory Authority of Pakistan (DRAP) with the presence of a patent or the resolution of patent disputes is not applicable under the statute. However, this matter is currently sub-judice before the Lahore High Court against a decision of the learned Intellectual Property Tribunal of Punjab – wherein the learned court has restrained the Drug Regulatory Authority from issuing a marketing approval for a specific drug – in a civil action for patent infringement filed by the patent holder.

The supplementary protection system is not recognised in Pakistan under any circumstances and the maximum term of patent protection is therefore 20 years, and this term cannot be extended further.

Once the patent application is accepted, the patent specification is open to the public and published in the Gazette of Pakistan. Any person, as defined under Section 2(p) of the Patents Ordinance, 2000 (ie, any natural or judicial person, which includes any association or body of individuals, whether incorporated or not), can submit written observations with evidence on the novelty of the invention in the prescribed format and for the prescribed fee. The Controller of Patents & Designs (the “Controller”) must consider these observations before granting the patent.

The person submitting the observations does not become a party to any proceedings under the Ordinance before the Controller merely by making observations under Section 24 if they have opted not to formally oppose and become a party to the proceedings.

The submitted observation, along with the evidence (documents), is shared with the applicant. The same observation is also shared with the examiner who accepted the application, for the comments. Upon receipt of the comments, they are shared with the applicant.

Remedies against a refusal to grant an intellectual property right for an invention are statutory in nature and depend on the type of IP in questions. For patents, the following remedies are available.

• Hearing before refusal – the Controller is required to provide the applicant an opportunity to be heard (Patents Ordinance, 2000) before taking any decision to refuse the patent application.
• Appeal to the High Court – if a patent application is refused by the Controller, the applicant may file an appeal before the relevant High Court having jurisdiction, within three months from the date of decision, order or direction of the Controller, as the case may be, of the federal government, or within such further time as the High Court may allow.

There is no administrative appeal within the Patent Office itself; remedies lie through judicial proceedings only.

In the event that an annual fee has not been paid within the prescribed time, the patent lapses. A lapsed patent ceases to have legal effect, and the patentee loses exclusive rights. However, there is a grace period of six months during which the patentee may pay the renewal fee along with an additional cost to seek renewal. If the renewal is not paid within this extended period, then the process of restoration becomes applicable, and the time limit for submission of the restoration application is 18 months from the renewal due date. The Controller may require evidence explaining the delay before deciding on the application. If restoration is not sought or is refused, the lapse becomes final and irreversible.

It is possible to amend a granted patent; however, this is subject to statutory limitations.

Under the Patents Ordinance, 2000, a patentee may apply to the Controller to amend the specification or claims of a granted patent. Such amendments are allowed only by way of correction, explanation, or disclaimer, and they must not extend the scope of the invention as originally disclosed. The said amendment is published in the Gazette of Pakistan.

Procedure of Amendment

An application for amendment is filed before the Controller, who examines whether the proposed amendment complies with the law, as the Controller has the discretionary power to take this decision. The amendment may be advertised, allowing third parties to oppose. The Controller decides the matter after hearing the parties if any opposition is filed.

Additionally, amendments may also be allowed during infringement or revocation proceedings where the validity of the specification or claim set is in question, with the permission of the court, subject to the same limitations.

There are several strategic actions available to address the infringement of a technical intellectual property right. These are as follows.

• Initiation of a legal notice (cease-and-desist notice) to the infringer, requiring them to stop the unauthorised manufacturing, use, sale, or distribution of the patented invention.
• Civil action against infringement before a competent Intellectual Property Tribunal – In such an action, the patent holder may seek temporary and permanent injunctions, damages, assessment of accounts, and costs of proceedings.
• Administrative action before customs – Section 15 of the Customs Act 1969 prohibits the import or export of goods that infringe IP laws including the Patents Ordinance, 2000. An application may be filed with the Directorate for IP Rights Enforcement at Customs, established pursuant to Statutory Regulatory Order 170 (I) 2017, to seize goods that may infringe the patent holder’s rights. If infringement is found, the Directorate is empowered to destroy the impugned goods.

Several remedies are available to third parties who seek to remove or limit the effects of a technical intellectual property right, particularly patents. These remedies include the following:

• pre-grant opposition – third parties may file an opposition to challenge a patent application before it is granted;
• revocation proceedings – a third party may challenge a patent after its grant through an invalidation or revocation action, either wholly or partially for specific claims, before the High Court of competent jurisdiction;
• civil action for groundless threats – if a third party has received a credible threat by the patent holder of initiating infringement proceedings, that party may initiate an action for groundless threats under Section 66 of the Patents Ordinance, 2000;
• declaration of non-infringement – a third party may seek a declaration from the relevant court that its product or process does not infringe the patent in question; and
• compulsory licence – an application for a compulsory licence allows a third party to use the patented invention without the patentee’s consent under specific circumstances such as public interest or non-exploitation of the paten (this remedy is rarely used in Pakistan due to strict statutory prerequisites, procedural complexities and economic constraints).

The availability and choice of remedy depend on the third party’s legal or commercial interest, the stage of the patent (pre- or post-grant) and the forum selected. Generally, a person must demonstrate a genuine legal or commercial interest such as being affected by the patent or intending to work the invention.

Pursuant to the Intellectual Property Organization Act 2012, exclusive jurisdiction for matters concerning infringement of intellectual property rights vests in the Intellectual Property Tribunal of competent jurisdiction. The system is generally structured as follows.

• First instance – Intellectual Property Tribunal of competent jurisdiction.
• Second instance – High Court of competent jurisdiction.
• Third instance – Supreme Court of Pakistan (with leave).

However, for revocation actions under the Patents Ordinance, 2000, the following structure applies.

• First instance – the Controller if within twelve months of the grant of the patent, and the High Court of competent jurisdiction thereafter.
• Second instance – if the action was before the Controller of Patents, then the High Court; if filed first at the High Court, the second forum is the Divisional Bench of the High Court.
• Third instance – any appeal from the High Court (acting in second instance) or the Divisional Bench lies before the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

There are no such specialised bodies in Pakistan, other than the courts and tribunals discussed in 2.3 Courts With Jurisdiction.

The only requirement for filing an action for patent infringement is for the patent to be sealed. No action for infringement would lie in the event that the patent had not been sealed.

It is not mandatory for the parties to a patent infringement suit to be represented by a lawyer. However, it is preferred that a party is properly represented given the legal intricacies involved and the due procedure to be followed, especially before the courts of law. Professional legal representation is therefore advisable.

The granting of interim injunctions under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code 1908 is available to plaintiffs/claimants. In most cases where compelling evidence is offered, the IP Tribunal also grants ex-parte interim injunctions. To be able to successfully make out a case for interim injunction, the Tribunal considers the following:

• Prima facie case – the claimant must demonstrate a strong prima facie case, showing the existence of a valid intellectual property right and a credible claim of infringement.
• Irreparable loss or injury – the court assesses whether infringement is likely to cause irreparable harm which cannot be adequately compensated through damages.
• Balance of convenience – the court weighs the relative inconvenience or hardship to each party and is more likely to grant the injunction if the balance of convenience favours the claimant.
• Impact of infringement – the extent and impact of the alleged infringement including commercial damage and dilution of the patentee’s exclusive rights.
• Conduct of the parties – whether the claimant approached the court promptly and in good faith and whether there has been delay or acquiescence.
• Urgency (for ex parte injunctions) – in the case of an ex parte interim injunction, the claimant must demonstrate urgency and a risk that advance notice would defeat the purpose of the injunction.

A potential opponent has several practical options to protect itself against enforcement or aggressive action by a patentee.

• Pre-grant opposition – a notice of opposition may be filed with the Controller after publication of the application, challenging patentability on grounds such as lack of novelty, inventive step, or industrial applicability.
• Post-grant revocation or invalidation – an opponent may file a revocation petition before the High Court to invalidate the whole patent or certain claims.
• Action for groundless threats – if threatened with infringement proceedings, the opponent may bring an action under Section 66 of the Patents Ordinance, 2000 for groundless threats of infringement.
• Security against interim injunction – in some cases, a defendant may request that a patentee furnish security as a condition for granting an interim or ex parte injunction, particularly where the patentee is not resident in Pakistan.

These mechanisms allow potential opponents to mitigate legal and commercial risks.

The Patents Ordinance, 2000, and the Patents Rules, 2003 do not prescribe a specific limitation period for initiating patent infringement proceedings. In the absence of an express provision, Pakistani courts usually apply the general law of limitation.

Under the Limitation Act, 1908, which is read with the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), a civil suit for infringement of rights is ordinarily subject to a three-year limitation period, calculated from the date on which the cause of action first arises (ie, the date on which the infringement comes to the knowledge of the aggrieved party).

Parties may obtain relevant information from third parties or regulatory bodies such as the Patent Office, provided that the information may be shared by that body in accordance with its applicable rules. For example, the Controller may provide certified copies of the patent specification, acceptance letter and the letter patent document.

However, information cannot be sought from an opponent as of right outside court proceedings. Such information may be sought only during trial in accordance with procedural rules, at the direction of the court or if voluntarily disclosed.

A lawsuit is initiated under the rules of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. This provides that the initial complaint, also referred to as a “plaint” must contain material facts that establish the cause of action, the court’s jurisdiction, the relief claimed, and the parties’ details. Moreover, it is mandated that the pleadings be concise, numbered into paragraphs, and verified on oath; failure to disclose a cause of action or meet statutory requirements can result in rejection of the plaint.

For IP lawsuits, the plaint must also clearly allege the existence and ownership of the IP right and the specific acts of infringement.

Parties may amend or supplement their pleadings with further facts or particulars at any stage if the court deems this “just and proper”, provided the amendment does not introduce an entirely new cause of action or unfairly prejudice the other side. Evidence itself is generally presented later during the trial phase, not in the initial pleading.

The IP laws including the Patents Ordinance, 2000 do not specifically address patent infringement or related proceedings initiated through class actions. That said, there is no bar on class actions in Pakistan so long as the nature of the claim and interest is the same. Under Order 1, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, multiple plaintiffs with common questions of law or fact and the same right to relief may be joined in one suit, which in practice permits class-action-type or representative litigation where appropriate.

The exercise of patent rights in Pakistan is not absolute and is subject to restrictions aimed at preventing misuse or abuse.

Key restrictions include:

• abuse of patent rights – where a patentee unreasonably restrains trade, refuses to license without justification, or engages in practices that harm competition, the government or an interested party may seek remedies including compulsory licensing; and
• public interest and national emergency – patent rights may be limited in situations involving public health, national security or public welfare.

Accordingly, patent rights in Pakistan must be exercised fairly, in good faith and in compliance with competition and public interest principles.

In an infringement proceeding, only the patentee, its licensee, or any authorised person whose name is entered in the Register of Patents as the proprietor at the time of initiating the proceedings is entitled to institute an infringement action against a potential or actual infringer who is directly or indirectly involved in making, using, offering for sale, selling, or importing the patented product or process. Moreover, an exclusive licensee may also file an action for infringement so long as their standing to initiate the action can be established through its contractual arrangement with the patent holder.

Pakistani patent law recognises a practical distinction between direct and indirect infringement, although the terms are not expressly defined in the Patents Ordinance, 2000.

Direct infringement occurs when a person, without authorisation of the patentee, makes, uses, sells, offers for sale, or imports a patented product, or uses a patented process, during the term of the patent.

Indirect infringement/contributory infringement applies where a person knowingly aids, or facilitates infringement, for example, by supplying essential components or materials specially adapted for use in a patented invention (eg, a mould of a patented design), with knowledge that they will be used to infringe the patent.

Similar remedies are available in both cases, which include:

• interim and permanent injunctions to restrain infringement;
• damages or account of profits;
• destruction of infringing goods; and
• costs of proceedings.

There are no specific statutory provisions in the Patents Ordinance, 2000 or the Patents Rules, 2003 that separately regulate process patent infringement where some steps of the process are carried out outside Pakistan.

However, there are a number of factors that must be considered when parts of the allegedly infringing process are practiced outside the jurisdiction. First and foremost, it is pertinent to see if the process is patented within that jurisdiction. Secondly, the claims made in the patent specification will need to be evaluated. If a claim independently made in the specification is wholly being performed in Pakistan, the patentee may sue for the infringement of that claim, irrespective of the fact that dependent claims/processes may be being carried out outside the jurisdiction.

The scope of protection of an intellectual property right is defined by the exclusive rights conferred under the applicable laws. For patents, under the Patent Ordinance, 2000, a patent allows the holder to prevent others from making, using, selling, offering for sale or importing the patented invention without consent. It also gives the patent holder the exclusive right to use and commercialise their invention, ensuring they can benefit from their innovation for the duration of the patent registration.

However, the Patents Ordinance, 2000 also provides also provides instances or acts that do not constitute infringement under Section 30(5):

• acts in respect of articles that have been put on the market anywhere in the world by the patent owner, with its consent, by an authorised person or in any other legitimate manner (eg, under a compulsory licence);
• use of patented articles on aircraft, land vehicles, or vessels of other countries that temporarily or accidentally enter the airspace, territory or waters of Pakistan;

• acts done solely for experimental purposes relating to the patented invention;
• acts performed in good faith by a person who, before the filing (or priority) date of the patent application, was already using the invention in Pakistan or was making effective and serious preparations to do so (prior user rights);
• acts, including tests, necessary for product approval for commercialisation after the patent expires; and
• acts done for teaching purposes in educational or research institutions.

There are substantive as well as procedural defences against infringement provided under the applicable laws. Similarly, under the Patents Ordinance, 2000, the following remedies are provided.

Substantive defences include the following

• An action for revocation of the patent based on validity issues (eg, not novel, obvious, not properly disclosed, or improperly granted). Under Section 60(2) of the Ordinance, any ground for revoking a patent is also available as a defence in an infringement action.
• Asserting statutory exceptions that list acts which do not constitute infringement (see 3.4 Scope of Protection for an Intellectual Property Right for a list of these exceptions).
• Establishing rights to use through a compulsory/non-voluntary licence.
• Patent exhaustion, where it can be shown that the patented product has been put on the market by the patent owner and thus that the patent holder’s rights over that specific sold item are exhausted, and therefore that further downstream use or sale is not an infringement.

Procedural defences include objections on the grounds of laches or acquiescence whereby a claimant’s unreasonable delay in asserting rights (where, for example, they knew about the alleged infringing activity but remained silent) may bar equitable relief, such as injunctions, because the claimant is deemed to have acquiesced.

In patent infringement suits or related proceedings under the Patents Ordinance, 2000, experts (called as scientific advisers) play a technical and advisory role. Their function is to assist the court in understanding scientific, technical or factual issues, or to provide an expert opinion on matters of fact, excluding questions of law.

Experts are appointed by the court, not by the parties. The court may appoint an independent scientific adviser at any stage of the proceedings, even without a request from either party, if it considers expert assistance necessary for the proper adjudication of the matter.

Parties may present their own technical evidence or expert opinions; however, the court-appointed expert remains independent and assists the court objectively in reaching an informed decision.

There is no distinct procedure for interpreting the terms of a patent’s claims separately. All granted or allowed claims remain enforceable only for the statutory patent term – ie, 20 years from the filing date or, where applicable, the priority date – after which all claims collectively expire.

Under the applicable laws and procedural rules, it is within the court’s power to appoint an amicus curiae or seek assistance from independent third parties where the issues involve technical complexity or matters of public importance. The provision in the Patents Ordinance, 2000 permitting the appointment of scientific advisers or experts is considered an analogous mechanism, reinforcing the court’s authority to obtain specialised technical input in patent disputes. Accordingly, in cases involving complex scientific questions, standard-essential technologies, or industry-wide implications, the court may justifiably rely on neutral expert assistance to ensure a fair, informed and technically sound adjudication of the issues in controversy

Under Pakistan’s patent law, the remedies and grounds for revocation (cancellation) of a patent are primarily governed by Sections 46 and 47 of the Patents Ordinance, 2000.

A patent may be revoked on substantive grounds, including

• that the invention is not patentable under the Ordinance (for example, lack of novelty, inventive step, or industrial applicability);
• that the invention falls within excluded subject matter;
• that the specification does not sufficiently and fairly describe the invention or the method of performing it;
• that the claims go beyond the disclosure;
• that the patent was obtained fraudulently or on false representation; or
• that the applicant was not entitled to the patent.

Failure to comply with mandatory requirements of the law may also constitute ground for revocation.

With respect to standing, Pakistani law allows only an interested person to file a revocation petition before the High Court. In addition, where a patent infringement suit has been filed, the defendant has the statutory right to raise revocation as a counterclaim in the same proceedings.

The principal remedy available upon successful revocation is that the patent is declared invalid ab initio, and all exclusive rights conferred by the patent cease to have effect. Courts may also grant ancillary relief, such as dismissal of infringement claims based on the revoked patent. These mechanisms ensure that invalid patents can be challenged either proactively through an independent revocation action or defensively as a counterclaim in infringement proceedings.

Pakistani law recognises the principle of partial validity, meaning that if only some claims of a granted patent are invalid while others satisfy the requirements of patentability, the court/Controller may invalidate only the offending claims and allow the remaining valid claims to stand.

Partial revocation is typically ordered where certain claims lack novelty or inventive step, are not sufficiently disclosed or extend beyond the original disclosure, while other claims are compliant with the Ordinance. This approach reflects Pakistan’s legal policy of preserving valid subject matter rather than cancelling the patent in its entirety where partial validity can be maintained.

Amendments in the specification are possible during revocation proceedings. Under Section 44 of the Patents Ordinance 2000, a patentee may apply to amend the specification or claims at any time, including during revocation proceedings before the High Court or where revocation is raised as a counterclaim in an infringement suit. However, such amendments are not automatic and are allowed only with the permission of the court once revocation proceedings have commenced.

In practice, amendments are permitted only to cure specific defects (such as lack of clarity, over-breadth or anticipation) and must not broaden the scope of the claims, add new matter or prejudice the rights of third parties. The court will allow it only where it serves the interests of justice and does not amount to an abuse of process. The fact that the specification has been amended is advertised in the official gazette of Pakistan.

The law provides a mechanism to consolidate jurisdiction and avoid conflicting decisions. Under Section 60 of the Patents Ordinance, 2000, where a revocation petition is pending before the High Court and an infringement suit is subsequently filed before another court, the infringement suit must be transferred to the High Court. Similarly, if revocation is raised as a counterclaim, the District Court or IP Tribunal must transfer the matter to the High Court.

Pakistani courts generally address revocation or validity first because an infringement claim cannot succeed if the patent is invalid. While matters may proceed in parallel, final relief for infringement depends on the outcome of revocation.

There is no special procedure for intellectual property rights cases and the trial is the same as in any other regular civil case governed by the Civil Procedure Code of 1908.

Under the Intellectual Property Organization of Pakistan Act, 2012 cases filed in the Intellectual Property Tribunal are handled by the presiding officer/judge of the Tribunal who is the final decision maker. The officer is appointed by the federal government in consultation with the Chief Justice of the relevant High Court and it is not a mandatory condition of appointment that the learned judge has experience in dealing with intellectual property matters. The appointee must be a former High Court judge, a current or former District and Sessions Judge or an advocate qualified for appointment as a High Court Judge.

The parties may themselves negotiate a settlement and thereafter seek the court’s endorsement by opting for disposal of the case in light of the settlement terms, as provided for under the Civil Procedure Code 1908. However, there are no mandatory settlement conferences or pre-action protocols to be complied with prior to, or during the course of, the proceeding.

Where parallel proceedings are pending before different fora, the nature of the proceedings typically influences how the courts manage any overlap. For instance, if a revocation action challenging the validity of a patent is filed before a competent court, a court seized of an infringement suit will generally be inclined to stay the infringement proceedings, regardless of which action was filed first, since patent validity goes to the root of the enforcement claim. Further, because revocation petitions lie before the High Court while infringement suits are instituted before the Intellectual Property Tribunal, the pendency of validity proceedings before a superior forum mandates a transfer of connected matters to avoid conflicting judgments.

When a patent right is infringed, a patentee or licensee may initiate a civil suit before an Intellectual Property Tribunal and claim the following.

• temporary or permanent injunction;
• damages;
• rendition of accounts;
• declaration that a valid patent is infringed; and/or
• destruction of infringing goods.

If a defendant successfully defends a patent infringement suit or establishes a claim of groundless threats, they may seek costs of litigation, damages and any other appropriate relief available under law, including declaratory and injunctive relief where warranted.

There is generally no material difference in the nature of remedies available across different categories of intellectual property rights, as enforcement actions are typically initiated by the patent holder or one with equivalent recognition such as an authorised licensee.

If an injunction is granted by the Intellectual Property Tribunal and the infringer files an appeal, this does not automatically stay the injunction or proceedings before the Tribunal. Proceedings continue normally and the infringer must comply with the order unless it is explicitly stayed by the High Court. Failure to comply may lead to contempt proceedings.

There are no special provisions concerning appellate procedure for intellectual property proceedings.

Strictly, an appeal ought to be limited to legal review. However, if there has been a material non-reading or misreading of essential facts, the appellate court is empowered to decide accordingly or remand the matter to the Intellectual Property Tribunal with directions to decide afresh.

There are no fixed costs for actions taken before filing a lawsuit (eg, warning letters or protective briefs) and these are dependent on the counsel being engaged.

Please note that the Court fees is calculated by the Court Fees Act 1870 (and which may vary from state to state) and is valued according to the claim alleged in a case and type of relief sought. Generally, the maximum cap of PKR 15,000 is applied in IP cases.

Court fees are calculated under the Court Fees Act, 1870, and they may vary from state to state. Fees are valued according to the claim and the type of relief sought. Generally, the maximum cap of PKR15000 is applied in intellectual property cases.

Recovery of costs, including attorney fees, court fees and expenses, may be sought by a successful litigant as provided under applicable laws, but such awards are seldom granted in intellectual property matters.

Alternative dispute resolution is mostly common in cases relating to trade marks, copyrights and designs where parties actively mediate issues relating to similarity in the pursuit of a co-existence scheme. However, ADR has rarely been applied in cases relating to patents in Pakistan.

The assignment of patent rights is permitted, but this is subject to specific statutory requirements and procedural formalities under Section 18 (for pending patent applications) and Section 55 (for granted patents) of the Patents Ordinance, 2000, and the Patents Rules, 2003. These provisions recognise two types of right transfers: assignment and transmission. Assignment may transfer the full right or partial rights, and transmission usually transfers full rights on the basis of the operation of law (eg, inheritance).

The key requirements are that the assignment of a patent or patent application must be in writing and the assignment deed should be signed by the assignor (patentee or applicant) or by an authorised representative thereof. The assignment must clearly identify the application or patent number, the extent of rights assigned (full or partial), and the territorial scope (if applicable).

Moreover, the assignment must be registered with the Pakistan Patent Office to be effective against third parties and to make it enforceable in legal proceedings through the assignee. It is pertinent to note that no prior approval of the Controller is required to assign a patent or application.

Where an application is made under the said Section for the registration of the title of any person, and where the Controller is satisfied that (i) proof of title has been shown, (ii) the person is entitled to a patent or a share in a patent, and (iii) there are no adverse implications for national security or public morality, the Controller will register that person in the Register as proprietor or co-proprietor of the patent, and enter in the Register particulars of the instrument or event by which the person derives title. Where that person is entitled to any other interest in a patent, the Controller will enter notice of this interest in the Register with the particulars of the instrument, if any, creating it.

To record an assignment, the following are typically required:

• a duly executed deed of assignment (original or certified copy);
• the prescribed application form;
• a power of attorney (if filed through an agent);
• the prescribed official fee; and
• a certified translation, if the assignment is not in English.

Upon receipt of the request, the Controller examines the documents for compliance with statutory requirements and, if satisfied, records the assignment and updates the ownership details in the Register. The details of this assignment are published in the Gazette of Pakistan. After registration, the assignee is recognised as the lawful owner of the intellectual property and becomes entitled to exercise and enforce the assigned rights, which are equivalent to the patentee’s rights, including the right to institute infringement proceedings in Pakistan.

The licensing of an intellectual property right, particularly a patent or a patent application, is regulated by the Patents Ordinance, 2000, and the Patents Rules, 2003. The licence agreement should clearly define the scope of the licence, including whether it is exclusive, non-exclusive, or sole; the rights granted; territorial extent; duration; financial terms; and any conditions or limitations agreed between the parties. While a patent licence is valid between the licensor and licensee upon execution of the agreement, it does not take effect against third parties unless it is recorded in the Register of Patents maintained by the Pakistan Patent Office.

The Controller examines the documents to ensure formal compliance but does not require prior approval of the licensing terms, as the Patent Office’s role is limited to recordal rather than substantive review. Once recorded, the licence is entered in the Register of Patents and becomes enforceable against third parties. Pakistan patent law also provides certain statutory safeguards and restrictions.

The procedure for licensing a patent or a patent application is governed by Section 55 of the Patents Ordinance, 2000, read with Rules 37 of the Patents Rules, 2003. The licensing process begins with the execution of a written licence agreement between the patentee (or applicant) and the licensee, clearly setting out the nature of the licence (exclusive, non-exclusive, or sole), the scope of rights granted, duration, territory, and commercial terms. Execution of the agreement itself is sufficient to create contractual rights between the parties.

To record a licence, the following are typically required:

• a duly executed License agreement (original or certified copy), by licensor and licensee;
• a certified translation, if the license agreement is not in English;
• the prescribed application form;
• a power of attorney (if filed through an agent); and
• the prescribed official fee; and

It should be noted that the Controller may call upon the parties or their representatives in-person for verification purposes.

The Controller examines the request for formal compliance and, upon satisfaction, records the licence in the Register of Patents. The Patent Office does not require prior approval of the licensing terms, nor does it conduct a substantive review of the commercial arrangements, except to the extent permitted under the law where terms may be contrary to public interest or national security.

Once the licence is recorded, the details are entered in the Register of Patents, which is open to public inspection. There is no mandatory separate publication in the Patent Journal for voluntary patent licences in Pakistan patent practice. However, in cases involving compulsory licences granted under Section 59 of the Patents Ordinance, 2000, the grant and terms of such licences are subject to publication as required by law.