The good, the bad and the interesting in the Australian IP Report 2026

The Australian IP Report 2026 is the latest in a series of annual reports issued by IP Australia, setting out the latest statistics and research on the use of IP rights in Australia. This year's Report, a reflection on 2025 trends, showed that while patent filing volumes remain stable, trade mark and design filings increased markedly. This article takes a closer look at the patent data and the implications and opportunities for the Australian IP ecosystem.

Filing trends

The numbers paint an overall picture of a relatively stable patent system in Australia. Standard patent application volumes have remained at around 30,000 per year for the past 10 years, with a slight increase in non-resident filings during the pandemic that now appear to have normalised relative to pre-pandemic filings. Meanwhile, resident filings increased by 9% in 2025 to the second-highest level in the past 10 years. US-originating applications remained the dominant source of patent filings in Australia at 40.8% (down 5% since 2024), followed by Chinese-originating applications at 9.7% (up 13.4% since 2024), then Australian-originating applications at 9.3%.

However, standard patent applications involving applicants from different countries fell by almost 15% in 2025. The Report suggests this is part of "growing fragmentation in global science and innovation networks".

Data Analysis Kat
In 2025, fewer applications entered Australia through the PCT national phase pathway, while direct filings increased correspondingly. The filing of provisional applications also increased by more than 58%, driven largely by Australian residents, individual applicants and first-time filers. The Report suggests that digital tools, including AI-assisted drafting and search tools, may be lowering the barrier to entry for early-stage inventors. However, while these tools may increase accessibility, they also raise concerns about, for example, speculative filings, disclosure quality and pressure on examination resources.

Technology trends

Health-related technologies, such as pharmaceuticals, medical technology and biotechnology, made up over 33% of Australian filings, remaining a dominant industry force in Australia. The Report describes these technologies as "anchor[ing] patent activity in Australia". This continuing strength appears to reflect the enduring importance of life sciences in Australia’s patent landscape, including growth in biotechnology and related health technologies.

Filings in the electrical machinery, apparatus and energy space, as well as transport technologies, also continued to increase (a trend beginning in 2021). In particular, there was a noticeable increase in Chinese-originating filings, and decrease in US-originating filings, in the transport space in 2025, which the Report suggests is "consistent with broader industrial repositioning toward electric vehicles and energy systems".

In contrast, filings in the computer-implemented invention (CII) technology space declined by more than 10% in 2025, although diversity in originating jurisdictions has increased since 2020. This is perhaps unsurprising in view of increasing uncertainty over the patentability of CII-related inventions in recent years, culminating in greater legal certainty following the Full Federal Court’s decision in Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Patents [2025] FCAFC 13 (IPKat). As acknowledged in the Report, as a result of the increased certainty provided in Aristocrat, "[f]ilings for some types of computer-implemented inventions are likely to increase in 2026".

Top domestic and international filers

Domestic filings were once again dominated by gaming company Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd, at 123 applications filed in 2025, seemingly undeterred by the changing CII landscape in recent years. In contrast, local software giant Canva dropped out of the top 10 domestic applicants, having previously been a dominant filer in Australia. The top 10 domestic filers were rounded out by a mixture of technology companies, individual applicants and research institutions.

The top 10 international filers included a range of global R&D powerhouses across a variety of sectors, including LG Electronics, Huawei, Caterpillar, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Nestlé. Consistent with the comments above, global pharmaceutical companies continue to be active filers in Australia. The Report notes that "[t]he composition of the international top filers remains broadly stable year-on-year".

Key takeaways

The Report suggests that Australia’s patent system remains stable, but that the composition of activity within it is shifting in important ways. However, although filings by Australian residents and early-stage participation have increased, the Report shows that total standard patent filings are largely unchanged and cross-border collaboration has declined. Taken together, these trends point to a more fragmented international innovation environment, with potential implications for cross-border patent strategy.

Encouragingly, resident filings strengthened in 2025, provisional filings rose sharply, and Australia continues to attract substantial patenting activity from overseas. At the same time, reduced international collaboration, easing US-origin activity and shifts in the technology mix point to a global patent landscape marked by greater selectivity and strategic repositioning. For Australian businesses, this underlines the importance of patent strategy as part of a broader commercial approach, in which filing decisions are closely linked to market access, collaboration and long-term positioning in global value chains.

The good, the bad and the interesting in the Australian IP Report 2026 The good, the bad and the interesting in the Australian IP Report 2026 Reviewed by Dr Claire Gregg on Thursday, June 04, 2026 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.