About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
Laws Treaties Judgments Browse By Jurisdiction

Hungary

HU108

Back

Act No. XXXVIII of 1991 on the Protection of Utility Models (consolidated text of January 1, 2018)

 Act No. XXXVIII of 1991 on the Protection of Utility Models (consolidated text of January 1, 2018)

Act XLVIII of 2001 on the protection of utility models Consolidated text (01.01.2018.)

1

ACT XXXVIII OF 1991

ONTHE PROTECTION OF UTILITY MODELS

Chapter I

SUBJECT MATTER OF AND RIGHTS CONFERRED BY UTILITY MODEL PROTECTION

Protectable utility models

Article 1

(1) Utility model protection shall be granted for any solution relating to the configuration or

construction of an article or arrangement of parts thereof (hereinafter referred to as "utility model") if it is

new, involves an inventive step and is susceptible of industrial application.

(2) An equipment and a system consisting of several, interconnected devices shall be considered a

utility model pursuant to paragraph (1); however, the aesthetic design of a product, plant varieties, chemical

products and compositions shall not be covered by the concept of utility model.

Article 2

(1) The utility model shall be considered new if it does not form part of the state of the art.

(2) The state of the art shall be held to comprise everything made available to the public by means of

a written communication, oral description, by use or in any other way, before the date of priority.

(3) The content of any domestic patent application or utility model application having an earlier date

of priority shall also be considered as comprised in the state of the art, provided that it was published or

announced in the course of the granting procedure at a date following the date of priority. The content of

such a European patent application and international patent application shall only be considered as

comprised in the state of the art on special conditions laid down in the Act XXXIII of 1995 on the Protection

of Inventions by Patents (hereinafter referred to as "the Patent Act"). For the purposes of these provisions,

the abstract shall not be considered as comprised in the content of the application.

(4) For the purposes of paragraphs (1) and (2), a written description or public use that occurred no

earlier than six months preceding the date of priority shall not be taken into consideration if it was made by

or with the consent of the applicant or his predecessor in title, or if it was due to an abuse of the rights of the

applicant or his predecessor in title.

Article 3

(1) The utility model shall be considered to involve an inventive step if, in regard to the state of the

art, it is not obvious to a skilled craftsman. The mere fact that the state of the art is consists of several

sources or that it consists of, wholly or in part, foreign language sources does not, in itself, establish

inventive step.

(2) For the purposes of examining the inventive step, the part of the state of the art referred to in

Article 2(3) shall not be taken into consideration.

Article 4

The utility model shall be considered susceptible of industrial application if it can be made or used

in any sector of industry, including agriculture.

Article 5

(1) Utility model protection shall be granted for a utility model if

(a) the utility model satisfies the requirements prescribed in Articles 1 to 4 and it is not excluded

from utility model protection under paragraph (2); and

(b) the application meets the conditions laid down in this Act.

Act XLVIII of 2001 on the protection of utility models Consolidated text (01.01.2018.)

2

(2) The utility model may not be granted protection if the exploitation thereof within the framework

of economic activity would be contrary to public policy or public morality; such exploitation may not be

regarded as contrary to public policy merely because it is prohibited by a law.

Inventor of the utility model and right to utility model protection

Article 6

The inventor of the utility model is the person who has created the utility model.

Article 7

(1) The right to utility model protection shall belong to the inventor or his successor in title.

(2) If two or more persons have created a utility model jointly, the right to utility model protection

shall belong to them or to their successors in title jointly. If two or more persons have created the utility

model independently of each other, the right to utility model protection shall belong to the inventor or his

successor in title who filed the application with the earliest date of priority with the Hungarian Intellectual

Property Office.

Article 8

In the case of utility models created by persons in employment relationship or in public service,

government service, state service or public employee legal relationship, or by members of a co-operative

working within the framework of a legal relationship of an employment nature, the provisions of the Patent

Act governing service and employee inventions shall apply mutatis mutandis.

Article 9

In any other matters concerning the moral rights of the inventor of the utility model, his

remuneration and his right to the utility model protection, the provisions of the Patent Act on the moral

rights of the inventor, his remuneration and his right to the patent shall apply mutatis mutandis.

Establishment and term of utility model protection

Article 10

Utility model protection shall begin on the date when protection is granted to the applicant, and it

shall be effective retroactively from the date of filing of the application.

Article 11

(1) Utility model protection shall have a term of ten years beginning on the filing date of the

application.

(2) Annual maintenance fees determined by a law shall be paid during the term of utility model

protection. The fee for the first year shall be due in advance on the filing date and the fees for the subsequent

years shall be paid in advance on the anniversaries of the filing date. The annual fee which becomes due

prior to the grant of the utility model protection may also be paid within a grace period of six months from

the date on which the granting decision becomes final, while all other annual fees may also be paid within a

grace period of six months from the due date.

Rights conferred by utility model protection, scope and limitations thereof

Article 12

Act XLVIII of 2001 on the protection of utility models Consolidated text (01.01.2018.)

3

Within the framework of the laws utility model protection shall afford the holder the exclusive right

to exploit the utility model or to license another person to exploit it. The exclusive right of exploitation shall

include the manufacture, use, putting on the market or offering for sale of a product that is the subject matter

of the utility model, or stocking or importing the product for such purposes within the framework of

economic activity.

Article 13

(1) The scope of utility model protection shall be determined by the claims. The claims shall be

interpreted only on the basis of the description and the drawings.

(2) Utility model protection shall cover any product in which all the characteristics of the claim are

embodied or in which one or more characteristics of the claim are replaced by an equivalent.

(2a) The content of the claims shall not be confined to their strict literal meaning; neither shall the

claims be considered to be mere guidelines for a skilled craftsman to determine the claimed utility model.

(3) Entitlement to remuneration deriving from utility model protection shall not be affected if one or

more characteristics of the claim are replaced in the product by improved characteristics made available to

the licensee by the holder of the utility model protection or by the inventor of the utility model.

Article 14

[repealed]

Article 15

[repealed]

Article 16

(1) If a protected utility model cannot be exploited without infringing the protection of another

utility model, a compulsory license shall be granted for the dominant utility model to the extent necessary

for exploitation.

(2) If a patented invention or a variety under plant variety protection cannot be exploited without

infringing a protected utility model, a compulsory license shall be granted for the dominant utility model to

the extent necessary for exploitation. Furthermore, the common provisions of the Patent Act on compulsory

licenses shall apply mutatis mutandis with respect to compulsory licences for protected utility models.

Article 17

(1) With respect to succession in title, to the pledging of rights deriving from utility model and from

utility model protection, as well as to license contracts, the provisions of the Patent Act shall apply mutatis

mutandis.

(2) With respect to the limitations and exhaustion of utility model protection, the provisions of the

Patent Act on the limitations and exhaustion of patent protection shall apply mutatis mutandis.

(3) With respect to joint right to a utility model protection and joint utility model protection, the

provisions of the Patent Acton joint right to a patent and joint patent shall apply mutatis mutandis.

Chapter II

INFRINGEMENT OF UTILITY MODELS AND UTILITY MODEL PROTECTION

Infringement of utility models

Article 18

Act XLVIII of 2001 on the protection of utility models Consolidated text (01.01.2018.)

4

Where the subject matter of a utility model application or of a utility model protection has been

unlawfully taken from another person, the injured party or his successor in title may claim the assignment,

wholly or in part, of the utility model application or of the utility model protection, as well as damages under

the rules of civil liability.

Infringement of utility model protection

Article 19

(1) Any person who unlawfully exploits a protected utility model commits an infringement of utility

model protection.

(2) The holder of the utility model protection may have recourse to the same civil remedies against

the infringer as a patentee, by virtue of the Patent Act, may have recourse to against the infringer of his

patent.

(3) In case of infringement of utility model protection, the provisions of the Patent Act shall apply to

the rights of the licensee authorized by the holder.

Decision on lack of infringement

Article 20

(1) Any person believing that proceedings for infringement of utility model protection may be

instituted against him may, prior to the institution of such proceedings, request a decision ruling that the

product exploited or to be exploited by him does not infringe a particular utility model protection specified

by him.

(2) Where a final decision on lack of infringement has been given, infringement proceedings may

not be instituted on the basis of the specified utility model protection in respect of the same product.

Chapter III

LAPSE OF UTILITY MODEL PROTECTION

Cases of lapse of utility model protection

Article 21

(1) Utility model protection shall lapse:

(a) when the period of protection expires, on the day following the date of expiration;

(b) if the annual fees have not been paid by the end of the grace period, on the day following the due

date;

(c) if the holder of the utility model protection surrenders the protection, on the day following

receipt of the surrender, or at an earlier date specified by the person surrendering the protection;

(d) if the utility model protection is revoked, with retroactive effect to the filing date of the

application.

(2) [repealed]

Restoration of utility model protection

Article 22

If utility model protection has lapsed by reason of failing to pay annual fees, the Hungarian

Intellectual Property Office shall, on request, restore the protection if the failure occurred for a justifiable

reason.

Act XLVIII of 2001 on the protection of utility models Consolidated text (01.01.2018.)

5

Surrender of utility model protection

Article 23

(1) The holder entered in the Utility Model Register may surrender utility model protection by a

written declaration addressed to the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office. If the surrender affects the rights

of third parties deriving from a law, from the decision of an authority or from a license contract recorded in

the Utility Model Register, or if a lawsuit is recorded in the Utility Model Register, it shall take effect only

with the consent of the parties concerned.

(2) It shall also be possible to surrender certain claims of the utility model protection.

(3) Withdrawal of the surrender of utility model protection shall have no legal effect.

Revocation and limitation of utility model protection

Article 24

(1) Utility model protection shall be revoked ex tunc if

(a) the subject matter of the utility model protection does not satisfy the requirements laid down in

Article 5(1)(a);

(b) the description does not meet the conditions laid down in Article 32;

(c) the subject matter of the utility model protection extends beyond the content of the application as

filed at the accorded filing date or – in the case of division – beyond the content of the divisional application,

or

(d) the utility model protection has been granted to a person who is not entitled to it under this Act.

(2) Where grounds for revocation exist only in part, the utility model protection shall be limited

accordingly.

(3) If a request for revocation has been rejected by a final decision, new proceedings for the

revocation of the same utility model protection based on the same facts may not be instituted by any person.

Reclaiming of royalties

Article 25

If utility model protection lapses ex tunc, only the portion of the royalties collected in good faith by

the holder of the utility model protection or the inventor of the utility model that was not covered by the

benefits derived from exploitation of the utility model may be reclaimed.

Chapter IV

PROCEDURES BEFORE THE HUNGARIAN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OFFICE IN UTILITY

MODEL MATTERS

Competence of the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office

Article 26

The Hungarian Intellectual Property Office shall have competence in matters relating to:

(a) grant of utility model protection;

(b) decision on lapse of utility model protection and restoration thereof;

(c) revocation of utility model protection;

(d) decision on lack of infringement;

(e) interpretation of utility model descriptions;

(f) maintenance and recording of utility model protection,

(g) provision of official information on utility model protection.

Act XLVIII of 2001 on the protection of utility models Consolidated text (01.01.2018.)

6

Application of the General Code of Public Administration Procedure

Article 27

(1) The Hungarian Intellectual Property Office shall proceed in utility model matters – with the

exceptions and additions laid down in this Act – in accordance with the provisions of the Act on the General

Code of Public Administration Procedure.

(2) In connection with the decisions of the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office no appeals, no

administrative or supervisory proceedings, and no notice or action of the prosecutor pursuant to the Act on

the Prosecution Service shall be admissible.

(3) Decisions of the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office taken in utility model matters shall be

reviewed by the court in conformity with the provisions of Article 37.

(4) In the absence of a provision of the Patent Act to the contrary, the Hungarian Intellectual

Property Office may withdraw or modify its decisions – terminating the procedure – taken in the following

matters only if a request for review is made and only until such request is transmitted to the court:

(a) grant of utility model protection;

(b) decision on lapse of utility model protection and restoration thereof;

(c) revocation of utility model protection;

(d) decision on lack of infringement.

(5) In the absence of a provision of the Patent Act to the contrary, the Hungarian Intellectual

Property Office may withdraw or modify its decision – terminating the procedure – taken in the matters

referred to in paragraph (4)(c) and (d) on the basis of a request for review only if it establishes that its

decision infringes a law or if the parties request unanimously the modification or withdrawal of the decision.

Article 28

(1) The general provisions of the Patent Act governing procedures before the Hungarian Intellectual

Property Office, including the provisions on the patent register and on official information, shall apply

mutatis mutandis to utility model matters before the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office, with the

following exceptions:

(a) a time limit set by the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office shall be at least one month, but not

more than three months;

(b) a time limit pursuant to point (a) may be extended, on request and before the expiration thereof,

by at least one month, but not more than three months;

(c) extensions of time limits exceeding in length or number those laid down in point (b) may not be

granted, not even in particularly justified cases;

(d) the terms patent application, patent and patent register shall be construed as meaning utility

model application, utility model and utility model register, respectively; provisions on the publication of

patent applications and on the application of the Patent Law Treaty shall not apply.

(2) The provisions of the Patent Act on administrative service fees of utility model procedures and

maintenance fees of utility models shall only apply if this Act does not provide otherwise.

(3) If for the same subject matter both patent and utility model protection has been granted, a final

decision in proceedings for the revocation of either of them shall bind the Hungarian Intellectual Property

Office, to the extent of the revocation established in the decision, in parallel proceedings on the validity of

the other protection.

(4) After the decision granting utility model protection becomes final, anybody may inspect the

documents of the utility model application and, subject to the payment of a fee determined by a law, may

obtain a copy of the same. After the decision granting utility model protection becomes final, or, if the

protectability opinion referred to in Article 36/B is drawn up thereafter, following the official information on

the protectability opinion, any person may inspect the protectability opinion and, for a fee, obtain a copy of

the documents thereof.

Act XLVIII of 2001 on the protection of utility models Consolidated text (01.01.2018.)

7

Utility model application

Article 29

(1) The procedure for the grant of utility model protection shall begin with the filing of an

application with the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office.

(2) A utility model application shall contain a request, a description of the utility model with one or

more claims, a drawing, and, where necessary, other annexed documents.

(3) The detailed formal requirements to be complied with by applications shall be laid down in a

Ministerial Decree issued by authorisation pursuant to this Act.

(4) A utility model application shall be subject to the payment of an administrative service fee

determined in a Ministerial Decree issued by authorisation pursuant to the Patent Act; the application fee

shall be paid within two months of the date of filing.

(5) Where the documents annexed to the application have been prepared in a foreign language, the

utility model description with the claims, as well as the drawing shall be filed in Hungarian within four

months of the date of filing.

(6) Until the decision granting utility model protection becomes final, the applicant may withdraw

the utility model application, in compliance with the provisions of Article 23.

Article 29/A

(1) The filing date of a utility model application shall be the date on which the application filed with

the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office contains at least the following:

(a) an indication that a utility model is sought,

(b) information identifying the applicant and making it possible to contact him, and

(c) a description and the drawing referred to therein, irrespective of whether they comply with the

other requirements.

(2) Instead of filing the description and the drawing, a reference to a priority document shall also

suffice for according a date of filing.

Derivation from patent application

Article 30

(1) Where the applicant has already filed a patent application at an earlier date, he may, in his

declaration of priority filed within two months after the date of filing of a utility model application for the

same subject matter, claim the filing date and the right of priority of the said patent application (derivation).

(2) The priority and filing date of the patent application shall apply by derivation to the utility model

application if the derived utility model application is filed with the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office

(a) in the course of a patent application procedure up to the date on which the decision on the grant

of a patent becomes final, or within three months from the date on which the decision refusing the patent

application becomes final, or

(b) within three months from the date on which the decision declaring the patent revoked for lack of

novelty or lack of inventive activity becomes final.

(3) The derivation of a utility model application shall be admissible only within 10 years from the

filing date of the patent application.

Article 31

[repealed]

Description

Article 32

Act XLVIII of 2001 on the protection of utility models Consolidated text (01.01.2018.)

8

(1) The description shall enable a skilled craftsman to carry out the subject matter of the utility

model on the basis of the description and the drawings.

(2) At the end of the description one or more claims shall define, with reference to other parts of the

description, the extent of the utility model protection applied for.

Unity of utility model

Article 33

A utility model application may seek protection for one utility model only.

Examination of the utility model application

Article 33/A

Following the filing of a utility model application, the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office shall

examine whether

(a) the application satisfies the requirements for according a date of filing pursuant to Article 29/A,

(b) the application fee has been paid pursuant to Article 29(4), and

(c) the utility model description and drawing have been filed in the Hungarian language pursuant to

Article 29(5).

Article 33/B

(1) If a date of filing cannot be accorded, the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office shall invite the

applicant to rectify the irregularities within two months.

(2) If the applicant complies with the invitation within the specified time limit, the date of receipt of

the rectification shall be regarded as the date of filing. If the applicant fails to comply with said invitation, no

date of filing can be accorded and proceedings shall be terminated.

(3) In the absence of information making it possible to contact the applicant, no invitation to rectify

the irregularities shall be issued, and the time limit of two months for the rectification of irregularities shall

be reckoned from the receipt of the application.

(4) The applicant shall be notified of the accorded date of filing.

(5) If the application fee has not been paid or the utility model description and drawing have not

been filed in the Hungarian language, the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office shall invite the applicant to

rectify the irregularities within the time limit specified in Article 29(4) and (5). If the applicant fails to

comply with said invitation, the application shall be deemed to be withdrawn.

Article 34

If the utility model application satisfies the requirements examined under Article 33/A, the

Hungarian Intellectual Property Office shall examine whether the utility model application meets the

requirements of Article 29(2) and (3).

Article 35

The Hungarian Intellectual Property Office shall carry out a substantive examination of the utility

model application with regard to the following points:

(a) whether the subject matter of the application is a utility model pursuant to Article 1;

(b) whether the subject matter of the application is susceptible of industrial application;

(c) whether the subject matter of the application is not excluded from utility model protection under

Article 5(2);

(d) whether the description meets the legal requirements (Article 32);

(e) whether the utility model meets the requirement of unity;

Act XLVIII of 2001 on the protection of utility models Consolidated text (01.01.2018.)

9

(f) whether priority for the utility model has been properly claimed and whether the applicant is

entitled to the claimed priority.

(g) whether the application has not been modified by adding new content, so that its subject matter

extends beyond the content of the application as filed at the filing date.

Procedure in utility model matters

Article 36

(1) If the utility model application does not meet the requirements examined under Articles 34 and

35, the applicant shall be invited, according to the nature of the objection, to rectify the irregularities, make a

declaration or divide the application.

(2) A utility model application shall be rejected, in whole or in part, if it does not meet the examined

requirements even after the rectification of irregularities or the making of a declaration.

(3) An application may be rejected only on grounds that have been precisely and expressly stated

and duly explained in the invitation.

(4) If the applicant fails to reply to the invitation or to divide the application within the specified

time limit, the utility model application shall be deemed to be withdrawn.

(5) If the utility model and the utility model application meet all the requirements of the

examination, the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office shall grant utility model protection for the subject

matter of the application.

(6) In utility model matters the provisions of the Patent Act on the effects of the European patent

application shall apply mutatis mutandis. The European patent application may be converted into a national

utility model application by applying the provisions of the Patent Act mutatis mutandis.

(7) Where the applicant indicates, in compliance with Article 43 of the Patent Cooperation Treaty,

that his international application aims at obtaining utility model protection in Hungary as a designated or an

elected country, for the procedure of the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office as a designated or an elected

office, the provisions of the Patent Act shall apply mutatis mutandis.

Application of the special procedural rules of the Patent Act

Article 36/A

In matters not regulated in this Act the provisions of the Patent Act shall apply mutatis mutandis

regarding the priority, classification, modification and division of utility model applications, and the

declaration of lapse, restoration or revocation of utility model protection, as well as regarding the

interpretation of utility model descriptions, and decisions on lack of infringement.

Protectability opinion

Article 36/B

(1) At the request of the applicant or – following the grant of utility model protection – at the request

of the right holder of the utility model protection, the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office shall draw up a

protectability opinion. The protectability opinion is a finding – based on novelty search, and containing also

reasons but having no binding effect beyond the legal effects specified in this Act – on whether the utility

model appears to meet the requirements of novelty, inventive step and industrial applicability.

(2) The protectability opinion is prepared independently of the examination of the utility model

application, and the utility model protection can be granted even before the protectability opinion has been

drawn up.

(3) An administrative service fee, fixed in a Ministerial Decree issued by authorisation pursuant to

the Patent Act, shall be paid for a protectability opinion.

(4) If at the time of the payment the right holder of the utility model application or of the utility

model protection is exclusively the inventor, he shall pay half of the fee of the protectability opinion. The

Act XLVIII of 2001 on the protection of utility models Consolidated text (01.01.2018.)

10

inventor is entitled to this reduction if in connection with the application the priority of no foreign

application has been claimed, or if the utility model protection is based on an application in connection with

which the priority of no foreign application has been claimed. The provisions of this paragraph shall also

apply if – in the case of several inventors – one of the inventors surrendered his utility model claim or right

to utility model protection in favour of a co-inventor, or if any of the inventors is succeeded by his heir.

(5) Article 69(1) and (2) of the Patent Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to the novelty search

necessary for drawing up the protectability opinion.

(6) The Hungarian Intellectual Property Office shall draw up the protectability opinion on the basis

of the description, claim and drawing at its disposal on the day of the filing of the request to this effect and

shall send it, together with a copy of the documents referred to, to the applicant or the right holder of the

utility model protection within six months of the filing of the request for the protectability opinion.

(7) Official information shall be published in the official journal of the Hungarian Intellectual

Property Office on the completion of the protectabilty opinion, simultaneously with the publication of the

grant of utility model protection, or separately, if the protectability opinion becomes available at a later date.

(8) On request, the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office shall refund the fee for the protectability

opinion if the protectability opinion is sent after the last day of the sixth month from the filing date of the

request.

Chapter V

COURT PROCEEDINGS IN UTILITY MODEL MATTERS AND LITIGATION

Review of decisions taken by the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office

Article 37

(1) Upon request, the court may review the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office’s

(a) decisions referred to in Article 27(4);

(b) decisions suspending the procedure or furnishing a basis for entries in the Utility Model Register;

(c) orders excluding or limiting the inspection of files against which independent legal remedy is

admissible under the provisions of the Act on the General Code of Public Administration Procedure;

(d) orders denying persons the legal status as a party to the procedure apart from those who have

submitted a request for the commencement of the procedure;

(e) decisions imposing procedural fines or ruling on the amount and on the apportionment of

procedural costs.

(2) A request for review brought against a decision imposing procedural fine or ruling on the amount

and on the apportionment of procedural costs shall have no delaying force with respect to any other

provisions of the decision not contested in the request for review, and shall not prevent them from becoming

final.

(3) Any order of the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office not referred to in paragraph (1) may

only be contested in a request for review of the decisions referred to in paragraph (1).

(4) Review of a decision may be requested by:

(a) any party to the procedures before the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office;

(b) any person excluded from, or limited in, the inspection of files;

(c) any person whose legal status as a party to the procedure has been denied.

(5) Review of a ruling on the registration or the revocation of a utility model protection may be

requested by the public prosecutor under Article 5(2). Any other participant to the procedures before the

Hungarian Intellectual Property Office may submit, in his own right, an independent request for review of

the decision or a provision thereof relating to him.

(6) The request for review must be filed or posted by registered mail, with the exceptions laid down

in paragraphs (7) and (8), within thirty days from the date of communication of the decision to the party

concerned or to any other party to the procedure.

Act XLVIII of 2001 on the protection of utility models Consolidated text (01.01.2018.)

11

(7) The time limit of thirty days for the filing of a request for review shall be reckoned from the

communication of the order refusing, or considering not to have been filed, the request for continuation of

the procedure or the request for restitutio in integrum, if

(a) that date is later than the date of communication of the decision under paragraph (6), and

(b) the request for continuation of the procedure or the request for restitutio in integrum was filed to

avert the consequences of an omission, which served directly as a basis for the decision under paragraph (6).

(8) [repealed]

(9) The request for review shall be filed with the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office, which shall

forward it, together with the documents of the utility model file, to the court within fifteen days except for

the case provided for in paragraph (10). Where an opposing party has taken part in the procedure, the

Hungarian Intellectual Property Office shall simultaneously notify the opposing party of the forwarding of

the request.

(10) If the request for review raises legal questions of fundamental importance, the Hungarian

Intellectual Property Office may make a written statement on such questions and shall forward it, together

with the request for review and the documents of the utility model file, to the court within thirty days.

(11) The following data shall be indicated in the introductory part of the request for review:

(a) the name of the court seised,

(b) the identification details of the applicant, and, if there is another party, the known identification

details of that party, and

(c) the name, seat, phone number, e-mail address of the legal representative, and, if there are several

representatives, the name of the representative designated for receipt of official documents.

(11a) The following data shall be indicated in the substantive part of the request for review:

(a) the number of the decision which the request for review is aiming to modify, and, where

necessary and available, the registration number, as well as the provision or part of the decision

that the request for review is aiming to modify,

(b) the specific request to the court for changing the decision, and

(c) the grounds demonstrating the necessity of changing the decision, together with the supporting

evidence and the pleas in law.

(11b) The following shall be indicated in the closing part of the request for review:

(a) the facts and the provision of law conferring jurisdiction on the court,

(b) the amount of the fees paid and the manner it has been paid, or in the event of a partial payment

of the procedural fees, the request for granting legal aid, or in the event of an exemption from

paying fees pursuant to a law, the facts and the provision of law serving as a basis of such

exemption,

(c) the facts and the provision of law evidencing the right of representation of the authorised person,

and

(d) the supporting evidence for the facts referred to in the closing part.

(12) In the case of a request for review filed late, the court shall decide on the request for restitutio

in integrum.

(13) In any other matters, the provisions on court proceedings for the review of decisions of the

Hungarian Intellectual Property Office in patent matters shall apply mutatis mutandis in court proceedings

for the review of decisions of the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office in utility model matters.

Utility model litigation

Article 38

(1) Utility model litigation:

(a) litigation concerning the grant, modification or cancellation of a utility model compulsory

license;

(b) litigation concerning the existence of the right of prior use;

(c) litigation concerning infringement, including in cases governed by point b) of paragraph (2) the

adjudication of objections relating to the invalidity of utility model protection.

(2) The provisions on patent litigation shall apply to utility model litigation with the following

exceptions:

Act XLVIII of 2001 on the protection of utility models Consolidated text (01.01.2018.)

12

(a) where, in the course of proceedings for utility model infringement, the defendant produces

evidence, before the court order closing the preparatory stage has been made, that he started proceedings

before the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office for the revocation of the utility model protection,

proceedings shall be suspended by the court until the final decision is taken in the proceedings for

revocation, with the proviso that if the right holder of the utility model protection submits, before the closure

of the hearing prior to the decision of the first instance, a protectabilty opinion to the court which is

favourable for him, the suspension shall not be mandatory;

(b) where, in the course of proceedings for utility model infringement, on the basis of the

defendant’s objection – if the suspension of the proceedings pursuant to point a) is not mandatory or

suspension would be inappropriate – the court shall examine also the validity of the utility model protection,

and if the conditions for the revocation of the utility model protection exist, it shall dismiss the action.

(3) In any other utility model litigation not mentioned in paragraph (1), the court shall proceed by

applying the rules governing patent litigation.

Chapter VI

FINAL PROVISIONS

Article 39

With respect to the grounds for revocation of a utility model protection granted with a filing date

before 1 January 2003, the provisions in force at the date of filing shall be decisive.

Article 40

The provisions of this Act laid down by Act L of 2017 Amending certain Acts in connection with

the Entry into Force of the Act on the General Code of Public Administration Procedure and the Act on the

Administrative Court Code of Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘Amending Act for Administrative

Procedures’) shall be applied in proceedings started after the entry into force of the Amending Act for

Administrative Procedures, and in cases re-heard by the authority on remand.

Article 41

[repealed]

Entry into force

Article 42

(1) This Act shall enter into force on January 1, 1992.

(2) The minister responsible for justice shall be authorized to establish by decree, in consultation

with the President of the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office and in agreement with the minister

exercising the rights of supervision over the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office, the detailed formal

requirements for utility model applications.