The Paris Convention 1883
Chapter Thirteen
Syllabus topic 1.3, "International Conventions and treaties regarding patents."
Pages 49 to 52 of 524
In one line
The Paris Convention is the 1883 treaty that stops a country from treating foreign inventors worse than its own, and gives an applicant twelve months to file the same invention in other member countries without losing the original date.
In the wording a student can write in an exam: the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, 1883, as revised, rests on three pillars, national treatment, the right of priority and the independence of patents, and India acceded to it on 7 December 1998.
Why a treaty was needed at all
A patent stops at a border, and inventions do not. By the 1870s an inventor who exhibited a machine at an international exhibition in one country destroyed the novelty of the invention in every other country before an application could be filed there. Exhibitors began to stay away.
The Vienna exhibition of 1873 was the trigger. Austria-Hungary passed a special law protecting exhibitors, and out of the conferences that followed came the Paris Convention of 20 March 1883, signed by eleven States. It has been revised seven times, most recently at Stockholm in 1967, and amended in 1979.
It is administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization, and TRIPS article 2(1) requires every World Trade Organization member to comply with Paris articles 1 to 12 and 19, which is how the Convention now binds States that never signed it. Chapter 160 works that through.
The three pillars
One: national treatment, article 2. Each member country must give nationals of other member countries the same protection it gives its own, and the same legal remedies against infringement, without any requirement of domicile or establishment in the country where protection is claimed.
What this forbids in practice is a rule that foreigners pay higher fees, that they must work the invention within a shorter period, or that they must sue through a local proprietor. India's Patents Act draws no distinction of nationality anywhere, which is national treatment carried out.
Two: the right of priority, article 4. An applicant who has filed a regular application in one member country may, within twelve months for a patent, file in any other member country, and that later application is treated as if it had been filed on the date of the first. Six months applies for industrial designs and trade marks.
What the priority period does. It fixes the date at which novelty and inventive step are judged, so anything published during those twelve months does not defeat the later applications. It does not extend the term, which still runs from the actual filing date in each country.
Three: independence of patents, article 4bis. Patents applied for in different countries for the same invention are independent of each other. A patent refused, revoked or allowed to lapse in one country has no effect on the patent in another. This is why an Indian revocation does not follow from a European one, and why Novartis losing in India did not disturb the Glivec patents elsewhere.
The Paris Convention 1883
The other provisions a student is expected to know
Article 4bis and article 4ter. The inventor has the right to be named in the patent. Section 28 of the Indian Act carries this out, and chapter 590 works it.
Article 5A: compulsory licences and forfeiture. Importation by the patentee of articles made in another member country does not entail forfeiture. Each country may provide for compulsory licences to prevent abuses resulting from the exclusive right, in particular failure to work, but such a licence may not be applied for before four years from filing or three years from grant, whichever expires last, and must be refused if the patentee justifies the inaction. Forfeiture is permitted only where a compulsory licence would be insufficient, and not before two years after the first compulsory licence.
Section 84 of the Indian Act is drafted inside those limits, which is why it opens with "at any time after the expiration of three years from the date of the grant". Chapter 770 works it through.
Article 5ter: vessels, aircraft and land vehicles. Use of a patented invention on board a foreign vessel, aircraft or land vehicle temporarily or accidentally in the country is not an infringement. Section 49 of the Indian Act carries this out, and chapter 670 works it.
Article 5quater: importation of products made by a patented process. Where a product is imported into a country where a process patent exists, the patentee has the same rights against the imported product as against products made in the country.
Article 11: temporary protection at exhibitions. Members must give temporary protection to inventions shown at official international exhibitions. Section 31 of the Indian Act, which chapter 410 works through, is the Indian expression of it.
Article 19: special agreements. Members remain free to make separate agreements among themselves for the protection of industrial property, provided they do not contravene the Convention. This is the article under which the Patent Cooperation Treaty and the Budapest Treaty exist.
A worked example
Priya Nambiar files an Indian patent application on 3 February 2026 for a water-cooled induction cooktop, with a complete specification.
On 20 May 2026 she publishes a paper describing the cooktop. In a world without the Convention, that paper would destroy the novelty of any application she made afterwards in Germany or Japan.
Article 4 saves her. She has twelve months from 3 February 2026. If she files in Germany on 15 January 2027 claiming Paris priority from the Indian application, the German application is treated as filed on 3 February 2026, so her own May 2026 paper is not prior art against it.
The Paris Convention 1883
But the term still runs from the German filing date, so her German patent expires twenty years from 15 January 2027, not from the priority date. Students confuse these constantly.
And article 4bis means the outcomes can diverge. If the German office refuses the application on a prior art document the Indian examiner did not find, the Indian patent is unaffected, because the two are independent.
Now suppose she never filed in India first, and exhibits the cooktop at an official international exhibition in Delhi in March 2026. Article 11 requires India to give temporary protection, and section 31 of the Indian Act provides that a display at an exhibition notified by the Central Government does not anticipate, provided the application is made within twelve months.
What it does NOT mean
It does not create a world patent. There is no such thing, and the Convention does not pretend otherwise. It coordinates national systems.
It does not harmonise substantive law. Each member decides for itself what is patentable, what the term is and what the remedies are. That is why India can have section 3(d) and Europe cannot.
It does not give the priority period automatically. The applicant must claim priority and file the priority document, and section 138(1) of the Indian Act requires a certified copy of the earlier application.
And it does not make prior use in another country irrelevant. Independence of patents concerns the fate of the patents, not the state of the art.
Quick revision
Signed 20 March 1883, revised seven times, last at Stockholm in 1967, amended 1979. Administered by WIPO. India acceded on 7 December 1998.
Three pillars. National treatment, article 2. Right of priority, article 4, twelve months for patents. Independence of patents, article 4bis.
Article 4ter: the inventor's right to be named, carried out by section 28.
Article 5A: compulsory licences permitted, but not before four years from filing or three from grant, whichever is later; forfeiture only if a compulsory licence would be insufficient.
Article 5ter: foreign vessels, aircraft and land vehicles, carried out by section 49. Article 11: exhibitions, carried out by section 31.
TRIPS article 2(1) makes Paris articles 1 to 12 and 19 binding on every WTO member.
Test yourself
1. State the three pillars of the Paris Convention with their articles. National treatment under article 2, the right of priority under article 4, and independence of patents under article 4bis.
The Paris Convention 1883
2. An applicant files in India on 1 June 2026 and in France on 1 May 2027 claiming priority. When does the French patent expire, and why? Twenty years from 1 May 2027. The right of priority fixes the date for judging novelty and inventive step; it does not move the filing date for the purpose of the term.
3. Which Convention article limits when India may grant a compulsory licence, and how is it reflected in the Act? Article 5A(4), which forbids an application before four years from filing or three years from grant, whichever expires last. Section 84(1) of the Patents Act allows an application at any time after the expiration of three years from the date of the grant.
4. Why does an Indian revocation not affect the same patent in Germany? Because of the independence of patents in article 4bis: patents applied for in different member countries for the same invention are independent, and refusal, revocation or lapse in one has no effect in another.
The rest of this subject
These notes are cut from the University's printed syllabus. Open the syllabus itself, or the past papers, for the same subject.