Portugal: New IP Code in Mozambique

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Portugal: New IP Code in Mozambique

Among Portuguese-speaking countries in Africa, one of the recent events regarding IP which deserves to be highlighted is the approval, in Mozambique, of the new Industrial Property Code (IPC) by Decree number 47/2015, published in the Boletim da República (Official Gazette) of December 31 2015, which comes into effect 90 days after its publication.

This new Code improves the drafting of some of its articles in an attempt to overcome doubts regarding the interpretation thereof, amends several deadlines aiming at a swift processing of the cases submitted to the Industrial Property Institute (IPI) and provides as well additional instruments for impugnation of a decision issued by the IPI.

The new drafting of number 3 of the IPC's article 162 clarifies that with respect to the deadline for the submissions of the Declaration of Intent to Use (DIU) for international trade mark registrations, the date to take into account will be the filing date of the mentioned application at WIPO's International Bureau.

With regard to patents, the main amendments introduced in the new Code bring the Mozambican legislation closer to the practices required for long in most of the countries/organisations and they do not constitute a novelty for the applicants of patent applications.

The major alteration in this IPC as far as patents are concerned is the substantive examination. Contrary to what happened before, the patent applicant will have to request that examination and pay the respective fees within 36 months after the filing date in Mozambique, while previously it was sufficient to comply with the formal requirements for the application to be published and granted.

Additionally, in the scope of this new IPC it was bestowed to the Inspecção Nacional das Actividades Económicas [National Inspection of Economic Activities] the responsibility to investigate the violations typified in Article 212 of the new IPC.

Lastly, this new Code stipulates that the Official Bulletin will be published monthly and that any gap in this new IPC will be regulated by the civil and criminal rules which do not contradict the industrial property principles.

Therefore, it is with great expectation that we wait to see how this new legislation will be enforced and if the changes introduced in it will result in benefits to all the economic agents.

Goncalves_Marcia
Matosa_Marco

Márcia Gonçalves

Marco Matosa


Raul César Ferreira (Herd) SARua do Patrocínio 941399-019 Lisboa, PortugalTel: +351 213 907 373Fax: +351 213 978 754mail@rcf.ptwww.rcf.pt

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

New partner Amir Ghavi, who will help launch the group, says he expects more lateral hires in the coming weeks
Counsel at three firms reveal the tools they’re using to generate patent invalidity claim charts and why they’re making investments in the technology
Eric Lee says the firm’s thought leadership on artificial intelligence convinced him to move
McKool Smith and Arnold Ruess are among the firms acting for InterDigital
Law firms are developing AI tools to improve productivity and efficiency – and that is having an impact on patent and trademark work
Harpreet Dhaliwal is HGF’s first lateral partner hire since it received private equity investment at the end of last year
Munich-based Epic Legal, founded by Nicolás Schmitz and Philipp Strommer, hopes to attract market talent by abandoning old-hat systems
OpenAI’s claims that China’s DeepSeek violated its proprietary technology should prompt the US company to rethink its past actions
OpenAI’s accusation against Chinese AI tool DeepSeek and a significant licensing deal for Nokia were among the top talking points this week
Counsel weigh in on how firms should be thinking about surveys in wake of closely followed trademark ruling
Gift this article