• About us
    Who We AreStaff DirectoryBoard of DirectorsHall of FameMember AwardsStrategic Plan / Annual ReportsCommittees/CommunitiesCode of EthicsEducational FoundationEquity, Diversity & Inclusion
  • Advocacy
    IPIC SubmissionsIPIC Intervention Policy
  • What is IP?
     IP BasicsOwn it. CampaignWhy Use a ProfessionalHow to Become an AgentIndigenous Traditional Knowledge
  • Education
    Certification ProgramsCourses & EventsCertified Canadian Patent & Trademark Administrator Search Tool
  • Resources
    NewsCIPRFind an IP ProfessionalIPIC Job BankIPIC Compensation SurveysMedia KitIP Assist
  • Membership
    Your profession. Our purpose.Join NowMember BenefitsMember CategoriesMember Referral ProgramInsurance Program: IP Agent Insurance
  • 0
  • FR
Tim Lowman
Aird & Berlis LLP
TopicsInsurance Committee
Share

An Important Message from the IPIC Insurance Committee

Published on October 29, 2021

Chair of the IPIC Insurance Committee Tim Lowman has provided an important update regarding insurance coverage for the profession, in terms of requirements laid out by the College of Patent Agents and Trademark Agents (CPATA). All IPIC Members need to take note of the resolution of the CPATA Board and its subsequent notice to the profession regarding insurance which must be obtained and maintained by CPATA members for the 2022 policy year. The relevant part of the Resolution is:

Whereas s. 34 of the CPATA Act mandates licensees be insured against professional liability;

And whereas it is in the public interest that the requirement for insurance be based on known and foreseeable risks;

And whereas the provision of patent and trademark services by licensees involves intellectual property rights and interests that extend beyond Canada, even if those rights are only initially registered in Canada;

And whereas it is imperative licensees acquire sufficient insurance to address the known and foreseeable risks associated with their individual or their firm’s practices;

And whereas the obligation of CPATA is to set minimum levels of insurance applicable to licensees, while recognizing minimum levels will not be adequate to address known and foreseeable risks associated with the practices of many licensees and their firms;

Be it resolved under s. 75(1)(q) and (r) mandatory professional liability insurance requirements will be:

  1. Commencing in 2022, Class 1 and Class 3 licensees, providing patent or trademark services to the public, must be insured under a liability insurance policy provided by an insurance company licensed in Canada, that will indemnify for civil liability arising from the licensee acting as a patent agent or a trademark agent;
  2. The limit of liability is a minimum of $1.0 million per claim and a $2.0 million aggregate;
  3. The liability insurance policy must cover claims made outside of Canada; and
  4. These requirements will be satisfied so long as inception of coverage under a liability insurance policy meeting the requirements commences in 2022. (Emphasis added)

 

IPIC Members should know that the longstanding and successful IPIC policy of professional liability insurance complies fully with all of the above CPATA requirements. The coverage provided by many other policies available in the marketplace and, most notably, the mandatory professional liability policies of provincial law societies other than British Columbia, do not.

Coverage under the IPIC policy has always been the broadest and most cost-effective available and, while the insurance market is seeing 20 to 30% increases in premiums for 2022, we are pleased to advise that IPIC insurance program members’ claims history and our deep connections in the relevant insurance markets has resulted in no increase in rates for our base policy in 2022.

We understand the problem of law societies mandating inadequate insurance coverage for Canadian lawyers who are also patent and trademark agents, and their mandating of the same inadequate coverage for non-lawyer patent and trademark agents who are in multi-disciplinary practices with lawyers. We have expressed concern about the issue for many years. We appreciate that this regrettable intrusion into what should be exclusive, specialized professional liability insurance for, and managed by, the IP profession has caused confusion among some IPIC Members as to what they are covered for, and to what extent.

We are here to help clear up any confusion.

For more information or a quote for the IPIC Insurance plan please contact:

R.J Farnworth, The Magnes Group Inc. Direct: 905-466-4711, Office: 905-845-9793, 363 rjfarnworth@magnesgroup.com        

Related Articles

May 22, 2025

Emerging Practitioners Considering Moving In‑House

Christopher Peng
Transitioning from private practice to an in‑house role can be a significant career shift for junior intellectual property professionals. This move offers new challenges and opportunities, shifting priorities from business development and billable hours to organizational integration and long‑term business strategies. In-House Practitioner Chris Peng walks through key considerations for emerging professionals considering this move.
TopicsEmerging Leaders Committee In-house Practitioners Community
February 14, 2025

Cleaning Out the Closet: The Trademarks Opposition Board is Reviewing the Register

Michael Badejo
Section 45 of the Trademarks Act has generally provided a way for trademark registration applicants and opponents to remove “deadwood”—unused and abandoned trademarks that were on the trademark register. This process was generally reserved for parties to begin and oversee. In December 2024, the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) advised of a pilot project which would see TMOB initiate section 45 proceedings. The effect? TMOB can clear the register of deadwood without waiting for applicants or opponents to initiate the process. Michael Badejo, Lawyer at Fillmore Riley LLP, walks us through how these changes impact operating procedures, processes and directions for TMOB. 
TopicsTrademarks
January 24, 2025

Practical implications of the Federal Court’s definition of “forced” divisional patent applications in NCS Multistage

Émilie Fleury
In NCS Multistage Inc. v. Kobold Corporation, 2023 FC 1486, the Federal Court revisited the question of what constitutes a “forced” divisional patent application—an important distinction given that forced divisionals enjoy immunity from double patenting allegations. This Emilie-Anne Fleury explores how the Court assessed whether certain divisional patents were truly “forced,” clarifies how voluntary versus forced divisions are treated under Canadian patent law, and highlights the practical considerations for patent applicants navigating unity of invention objections.
TopicsPatents

MISSION

Our mission is to enhance our members’ expertise as trusted intellectual property advisors, and to shape a policy and business environment that encourages the development, use, and value of intellectual property.


VISION

Our vision is for IPIC to be the leading authority on intellectual property in Canada, and the voice of intellectual property professionals.

LATEST TWEETS

Twitter feed is currently not available

CONTACT US

360 Albert Street, Suite 550
Ottawa, ON K1R 7X7

T 613-234-0516
E admin@ipic.ca

LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The IPIC office is located in Ottawa, on the traditional, unceded territories of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg people.

©2021 Intellectual Property Institute of Canada, Ottawa, ON
Designed by Ottawa Web Design driven by Member Management Software