Secondary IP Legislation for Bahamas Released
· Secondary implementation legislation for new Bahamian IP laws regulations released
· Higher trademark fees, with registration now USD 300 and renewals USD 100
· Multi-class filings allowed and Nice classification confirmed
· Key procedural changes include longer opposition period and extended priority document window
· Ongoing uncertainty on transitional filings and change of ownership documentation
In February of this year, the Bahamian IPO (BIPO) made a surprise announcement to local practitioners that the new IP laws for trademarks, patents, and copyright became effective retroactively as of February 1, 2025. The announcement was made without prior notice to practitioners.
At the time of the announcement, the accompanying implementing regulations were conspicuously absent. While practitioners eagerly awaited the critical secondary legislation, BIPO was not providing its full range of services. It did continue to afford filing dates to applications, to be fully processed once the new regulations were in place. There was a considerable amount of uncertainty during this period which extended through much of the summer. However, IP stakeholders remained upbeat as the Trade Marks Act, 2024 would represent a significant step forward for trademarks in The Bahamas (the introduction of service marks and expected adoption of international classification being particular highlights).
BIPO finally released the corresponding implementing regulations in July with retroactive effect to May 23, 2025. There remains a significant amount of uncertainty and ambiguity on some of the provisions’ practical implications, and conversations with the authorities remain ongoing. It is also unclear how the regulations will impact marks filed and other actions taken in the transitional periods between the Act’s effective date and the Regulations’ effective date, let alone how the Regulations will apply retroactively to actions taken after their effective date. However, some interesting new practice aspects are confirmed, as follows:
There is a not-insignificant increase in official filing fees, with the total fee for registration of a mark in one class increasing to USD 300 (up from USD 130).
Renewal fees also increase modestly to USD 100 (up from USD 80).
The availability of multi-class applications has been confirmed, which in some cases may offset the official fee increases for new filings.
The opposition period is now two months from date of publication instead of one month, and deadline flexibility with respect to public holidays and weekends is provided, with the regulations explicitly stating that deadlines falling on these days carry over to the next business day.
A relaxed timeline for filing of priority documents, which can now be submitted up to three months after the priority filing deadline.
In addition to the above, the Registrar has the discretion to grant extensions for most deadlines, even extending to missed deadlines, provided the request is submitted within three months of the missed date and includes supporting arguments. Such extensions are granted entirely at the Registrar’s discretion, and so it is still advisable to submit any request before the applicable deadline expires.
In addition to the renewal fees mentioned above, the new regulations indicate that if a renewal fee is not paid by expiration, the Registrar will publish a notice in the Gazette; the owner then has one month to pay the renewal and late fee or the mark is removed (effective from the original expiration date). Removal can be reversed through restoration at the Registrar’s discretion — with no time limit (and a $350 official fee) — although it is yet to be seen what would be considered sufficient cause for reversing a removal.
Clarification is still awaited on the documents required for recording changes to ownership, as in the past the requirements were particular and sometimes difficult for brand owners to produce the necessary documents.
Appeals of any registry decision to the courts must be made within one month from the date of the decision (or within such further time as the Court shall allow).
Despite the arrival of the regulations, BIPO’s approach to both new and pending filings could shift at any time. Brand owners, especially those seeking service mark protection, should remain alert and carefully analyze the risks when filing during this uncertain transition period in Bahamian trademark law.