Filing Yourself vs Using an Agent in Nepal

The Patent, Design and Trade Mark Act 1965 never uses the word "agent". Sec. 20 says a person may appoint an attorney, and that whatever the attorney does counts as your own act. Both halves of that sentence matter.

Key takeaways

• Nothing in the Act requires representation. Sec. 20 is permissive, and the words "agent" and "representative" appear zero times in it.
• Sec. 20 also says every action your attorney takes "shall be deemed to have been taken by him/herself" — their missed deadline is legally yours.
• An attorney gets no extra power from the Act. The Department examines the same mark against the same grounds either way.
• Sec. 17(1) wants the Schedule 1(c) form plus four specimens of the mark.
• There are two separate official charges: an application fee under Sec. 17(2) and a registration fee under Sec. 18(2).
• Sec. 18A(2) requires a separate application for each NICE classification category.
• Sec. 27 gives only 35 days to appeal a Departmental order to the Appellate Court.

Does Nepali law require a trademark agent?

No. We read the consolidated Act published by the Nepal Law Commission and counted: "agent" appears zero times, and so does "representative". There is no registered profession of trademark agent created by this statute.

What exists instead is Sec. 20, headed "Right to appoint Attorney". It is a permission granted to you, not a condition imposed on you. A Nepali individual, firm or company can walk an application into the Department of Industry and file it.

That is worth saying plainly, because a good deal of Nepali IP writing implies otherwise. Filing yourself is lawful, it is ordinary, and for a simple mark it is a reasonable thing to do.

What exactly does Sec. 20 give an attorney?

Standing, and nothing else. The section reads: "A person may appoint an attorney or legal practitioner for to take any Action so required under this Act, and all Actions taken by such attorney or legal practitioner shall be deemed to have been taken by him/herself."

Read that against the rest of the Act and the gap is striking. No section gives an attorney a faster queue, a different examination, a longer objection period or any evidentiary advantage. The Department applies Sec. 18 to the mark, not to the person who handed it over.

So the honest way to frame the choice is not "lawful route versus risky route". It is: who is going to do the work, and who carries the consequence when a date slips.

Why does the deeming clause matter so much?

Because it settles where the risk sits. "Deemed to have been taken by him/herself" means your attorney's filing is your filing, and your attorney's silence is your silence.

If an appointed attorney lets the Sec. 27 appeal period run out, the Act treats that as you letting it run out. You may well have a separate complaint against them, but the Department's file simply records that nothing was done in time.

That cuts both ways, and it is the strongest argument for choosing carefully rather than for choosing at all. It also means a power of attorney is not a formality to sign and forget.

What is identical whichever route you take?

More than most comparisons admit. The mark is examined under the same proviso to Sec. 18(1), which lets the Department refuse a mark that hurts the prestige of a person or institution, harms public conduct, morality or the national interest, damages another mark's reputation, or is already registered to someone else.

The 2006 amendment added a duty on the Department to "conduct necessary investigation and provide sufficient opportunity to defend him/herself". That right to be heard belongs to the applicant, whoever filed.

Publication, the objection stage, the seven-year term under Sec. 18D and the renewal procedure in Sec. 23B are all the same too. You are choosing a helper, not a different legal track.

What does the application itself require?

Less paperwork than people expect, and more precision. Sec. 17(1) asks for an application in the format set out in Schedule 1(c), together with four specimens of the trademark.

Schedule 1(c) itself is two sentences long. It says you intend to affix, or have been affixing, the mark on a stated thing, and asks for registration in your name along with four samples and the application fee.

Around that minimum, Nepali practice has built the familiar bundle: company registration, tax clearance, a board resolution where a company signs, and notarisation where a document needs it. Our guides to board resolutions and notarisation requirements cover those.

Why are there two fees, not one?

Because the Act splits them. Sec. 17(2) sets an application fee payable when you file. Sec. 18(2) sets a separate registration fee payable to obtain the registration certificate.

That structure trips up self-filers who budget once and are surprised later. It is also why "filing yourself is cheaper" is only partly true: the official charges in Schedule 3 are the same for everybody, and the Government may alter them by a Gazette notification under Sec. 26A.

We do not publish figures here, because they change and because the right number depends on your classes. Ask us through our contact page and you will get the current position.

Where does a self-filer actually get into trouble?

Three places, and they are all deadline-shaped rather than form-shaped.

The first is the examination response. When the Department raises a similarity or refusal point under Sec. 18, you are being asked to argue law, not to supply a missing paper. Our note on confusingly similar marks shows what that argument looks like.

The second is the objection stage. Sec. 21A(2) allows a complaint within 35 days of publication, while Nepali trademark practice commonly works to a 90-day opposition window after publication in the Industrial Property Bulletin. The two differ, so prepare to the shorter one and confirm the date with the Department of Industry.

The third is the appeal. Sec. 27 gives 35 days from a Departmental order to appeal to the Appellate Court. That is a short window for a first-time applicant to find counsel, read the order and settle grounds.

Can a foreign owner file without a Nepali agent?

The Act does not say they must use one, but the practical answer is usually different. Sec. 21B is blunt: a title registered in a foreign country is not valid in Nepal unless it is registered here by the concerned person.

Nepal is absent from the WIPO-administered Madrid System, so there is no international registration covering the country and no shortcut around a national filing. Sec. 21C does soften it: the Department may register a foreign-registered mark without conducting enquiries where the foreign certificate is filed, and extends Paris Convention facility to the holder.

Running that from abroad means someone in Nepal has to sign, serve, pay and attend. In practice that is why foreign owners appoint an attorney under Sec. 20, not because the Act compels it.

How does class choice change the decision?

It is the most common place a self-filed application quietly goes wrong. Sec. 18A(2) requires a separate application for goods or services in different categories, so one filing covers one class.

Sec. 18A(3) adds that a mark registered in one category may also be registered in another where it properly falls. That is an opportunity, not an automatic extension, and it has to be applied for.

Start with our free NICE class finder, then test the names already published in that class with the conflict checker. If the answer is ambiguous, that ambiguity is itself the signal to get advice.

What does the filing file look like?

Whichever route you choose, assemble the same bundle in this order.

1. Search first. Check the letters, the sound and the overall look against published marks in your class using the Nepal trademark database.
2. Fix the mark. Decide whether you are filing the word, the device, or both, and keep the exact version you will file.
3. Pick the class. Match it to what you actually sell, and plan a second application rather than stretching one.
4. Prepare four specimens. Sec. 17(1) and Schedule 1(c) both ask for four, and a short file comes back.
5. Gather the company papers. Registration, tax clearance and a board resolution where the applicant is a company.
6. File, and keep the acknowledgement. In a first-to-file system that date is the thing you are buying.
7. Diary the dates. Publication, the objection period, the certificate, then the renewal under Sec. 23B.

When is filing yourself sensible?

When the mark is an invented word, the class is obvious, the applicant is a Nepali person or company that can sign for itself, and a search turns up nothing close.

A Pokhara bakery registering a coined name for bakery services is the clearest example. The file is short, nobody is likely to object, and the money is better spent on a proper search than on representation.

Being able to reach the counter also matters. If you are in Kathmandu and can return when the Department asks something, the practical burden is small. Our note on the DoI filing counters describes what that visit involves.

When does an attorney earn the appointment?

When judgement is required rather than diligence. A clearance search that turns up a close earlier mark, a device mark whose similarity is arguable, a refusal that has to be answered, an objection filed against you, or ownership that sits in more than one entity.

Foreign applicants and bad-faith squatting situations belong in the same list. So does any file where losing the mark would genuinely damage the business, because the cost of representation is small next to that.

Our clearance search service is often the better first purchase, and full registration the right one when the search comes back complicated.

What does neither route remove?

Two post-registration duties that catch owners of both kinds. Sec. 18C says a mark not brought into use within one year of registration will be inquired into and cancelled.

Sec. 23B sets renewal within 35 days of expiry, with a six-month late window on payment of a fine, after which the registration is automatically cancelled. The renewal term for a trademark is seven years, repeatable any number of times.

Our renewal calculator will date the next one for you, and the renewal service tracks it if you would rather not.

Common mistakes

Treating a company registration as a trademark is the most expensive. The Office of the Company Registrar gives you a company name; only the Department gives you the mark.

Assuming an attorney can promise registration is the next. No honest practitioner will, and the Act gives them no power to influence the examination.

Last, filing a version of the logo you have already stopped using. The registration covers what was filed, and quietly redesigning afterwards can leave you protecting the wrong thing.

What would this look like in practice?

Here is an illustration, not a real case. Two founders file the same week. One registers a coined word for a single service class and files everything herself.

The other files a device mark close to an existing brand, gets a refusal citing the Sec. 18(1) proviso, and has 35 days under Sec. 27 if he wants to appeal. He now needs counsel in a hurry, and at a worse price than if he had bought a search.

Same statute, same counter, same fees. The difference was decided before either of them filed.

In short

Sec. 20 makes representation optional and makes it binding. Nothing in the Act favours an attorney's application over yours, so file yourself where the mark is clean and the class is clear.

Pay for help where judgement, a deadline or a foreign owner is involved, and pay for a search before either. More Nepali startups are filing, which also means more collisions.

People also search for

• Power of attorney for trademark filing in Nepal
• Tax clearance and PAN in trademark filing
• The DoI filing process, counters and online services
• When are two marks confusingly similar in Nepal?

Not sure which side of the line your mark falls on? Send us the name and the class and we will say so plainly, including when you do not need us. Contact the IP Sewa team.