The Taipei Economic & Cultural Office in New Zealand and the New
Zealand Commerce and Industry Office (hereinafter referred to as
"the Parties"),
Recognizing the need to promote extensive, close and friendly
commercial, cultural and other relations;
Desiring to facilitate the expansion of trade and commerce on a
non-discriminatory basis; and
Considering the need to provide adequate and effective protecti-
on of industrial property rights, particularly in respect of pa-
tents, trademarks (including service marks), industrial designs
and patents for design on a reciprocal basis;
Have reached the following understanding:

Implementing Authorities
1.The authorities implementing this Arrangement will be the Nat-
ional Bureau of Standards in Taipei and the New Zealand Minis-
try of Commerce, in Wellington.

Scope of this Arrangement
2."Industrial property rights" will be understood in the broade-
st sense and will apply not only to industry and commerce, but
likewise to agricultural and extractive industries and to all
manufactured or natural products, for example, wines, grain,
tobacco leaf, fruit, cattle, minerals, mineral waters, beer,
flowers, and flour.
3. "Territory" means:
(a) in respect of the Ministry of Commerce, the area to which
the industrial property rights legislation of New Zealand
applies:
(b) in respect of the National Bureau of Standards in Taipei,
the area to which the industrial property rights legislation
of the geographical area of Taiwan and other outlying islan-
ds under the same jurisdiction applies.
4.(a) "Patents" will include the various kinds of industrial pa-
tents recognized by the Laws in the Implementing Authorit-
ies' respective territiories, such as petty patents, pate-
nts of addition, utility models etc.
(b) "Trademarks" (including "service marks") shall include the
various kinds of marks recognized by the Laws in the Impl-
ementing Authorities' respective territories, including
certification marks and collective marks.
5.A "protected person" for the purposes of this Arrangement will
mean an individual who under the laws of either territory wou-
ld be considered a citizen or national of that territory, and
includes a legal person or a company incorporated under the
laws in force in the respective Parties' territories.

National Treatment
6.A protected person of either territory will enjoy in the other
territory the advantages that the respective industrial prope-
rty rights laws of the other territory now grant, or may here-
after grant, to its own protected persons; all without prejud-
ice to the rights specially provided for in this Arrangement.
Consequently, they will have the same protection as the latter
, and the same legal remedy against any infringement of their
rights, provided that the conditions and formalities imposed
upon protected persons are complied with.
7.However, no requirement as to domicile or establishment in ei-
ther territory where protection is claimed may be imposed upon
a protected person of the other territory for the enjoyment of
any industrial property rights.
8.The provisions of the laws of each of the territories relating
to judicial and administrative procedure and to jurisdiction,
and to the designation of an address for service or the appoi-
ntment of an agent, which may be required by the laws on indu-
strial property rights are expressly reserved.

Priority Rights
9.Any protected person who has duly filed an application for a
patent as so stipulated in paragraph 4, or for the registrati-
on of an industrial design, or of a patent for design, or of a
trademark (including a service mark), in one territory, or his
/her successor in title, will enjoy, for the purpose of filing
in the other territory, a right of priority during the periods
hereinafter fixed.
10.Any filling by a protected person in one territory that is
equivalent to a regular national filing under the domestic
legislation of that territory will be recognized as giving
rise to the right of priority in the other territory.
11.By a regular national filing is meant any filing that is ade-
quate to establish the date on which the application was fil-
ed in the territory concerned, whatever may be the subsequent
fate of the application.
12.Rights acquired by third parties before the date of the first
application that serves as the basis for the right of priori-
ty are reserved in accordance with the domestic legislation
of each territory.
13.The periods of priority referred to in paragraph 9 will be
twelve months for patents and six months for industrial desi-
gns, patents for design, and trademarks (including service
marks).
14.The periods referred to in paragraph 13 will start from the
date of filing of the first application; the day of filing
will not be included in the period.
15.If the last day of the period of priority is an official hol-
iday, or a day when the office of the implementing authority
is not open for the filing of applications in the territory
where protection is claimed, the period will be extended unt-
il the first following working day.
16.A subsequent application concerning the same subject as a pr-
evious first application within the meaning of paragraph 14,
above, filed in the same territory will be considered as the
first application, of which the filing date will be the star-
ting point of the period of priority, if, at the time of fil-
ing the subsequent application, the said previous application
has been withdrawn, abandoned, or refused, without having be-
en laid open to public inspection and without leaving any ri-
ghts outstanding, and if it has not yet served as a basis for
claiming a right of priority. The previous application may
not thereafter serve as a basis for claiming a right of prio-
rity.
17.Amy protected person desiring to take advantage of the prior-
ity of a previous filing will be required to make a declarat-
ion indicating the date of such filing. Each implementing au-
thority will determine the latest date on which such declara-
tion must be made.
18.The particulars referred to in paragraph 17 will be mentioned
in the publications issued by the implementing authority, and
in particular in the patents and the specifications relating
thereto.
19.The implementing authorities may require any protected person
making a declaration of priority to produce a copy of the ap-
plication (description, drawings, etc.) previously filed. The
copy, certified as correct by the authority which received
such application, will not require any authentication, and
may in any case be filed, without fee, at any time within th-
ree months of the filing of the subsequent application. They
may require it to be accompanied by a certificate from the
same authority showing the date of filing, and by a translat-
ion.
20.No other formalities may be required for the declaration of
priority at the time of filing the application. Each impleme-
nting authority will determine the consequences of failure to
comply with the formalities provided for in paragraphs 9 to
27, but such consequences will in no case go beyond the loss
of the right of priority.
21.Any protected person who avails himself/herself of the prior-
ity of a previous application will be required to specify the
number of that application; this number will be published as
provided for by paragraph 18, above.
22.Where an industrial design or patent for design is filed in a
territory by virtue of a right of priority based on the fili-
ng of a utility model, the period of priority will be the sa-
me as that fixed for industrial designs or patents for design
.
23.Furthermore, it is permissible to file a utility model, if
the laws of that territory so allow, by virtue of a right of
priority based on the filing of a patent application, and vi-
ce versa.
24.Neither implementing authority may refuse a priority or a pa-
tent application on the ground that the applicant claims mul-
tiple priorities, or on the ground that an application claim-
ing one or more priorities contains one or more elements that
were not included in the application or applications whose
priority is claimed, provided that, in both cases, there is
unity of invention within the meaning of the law of the terr-
itory. With respect to the elements not included in the appl-
ication or applications whose priority is claimed, the filing
of the subsequent application will give rise to a right of
priority under ordinary conditions.
25.If the examination reveals that an application for a patent
contains more than one invention, the applicant may divide
the application into a certain number of divisional applicat-
ions and preserve as the date of each the date of the initial
application and the benefit of the right of priority, if any.
26.The applicant may also, on his/her own initiative, divide a
patent application and preserve as the date of each division-
al application the date of the initial application and the
benefit of the right of priority, if any. Each implementing
authority will have the right to determine the conditions un-
der which such division will be authorized.
27.Priority may not be refused on the ground that certain eleme-
nts of the invention for which priority is claimed do not ap-
pear among the claims formulated in the application in the
other territory, provided that the application documents as a
whole specifically disclose such elements.

Most-favored-nation Treatment
28.Each implementing authority will endeavor to ensure that the
relevant authority in its territory takes steps, as regards
the protection of industrial property rights, to accord imme-
diately and unconditionally to the protected persons of the
other Party's territory, any advantage, favor, privilege or
immunity granted to the nationals of any other country.

Commencement, Implementation and Review
29.Either party or implementing authority may, at any time, req-
uest consultations on any matter relating to the implementat-
ion or application of this Arrangement.
30.This Arrangement will enter into effect after each Party has
notified each other in writing of the completion of legal pr-
ocedures necessary for the implementation of this Arrangement
. The date of entry into effect will be the date of the last
of these two notifications.
31.Either of the Parties may terminate this Arrangement upon gi-
ving six (6) months' prior written notice.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being duly authorized ther-
eto, have signed this Arrangement.
Done in Taipei on this 30th day of October, 1998 in duplicate in
the Chinese and English languages, both texts having equal vali-
dity.

FOR THE TAIPEI ECONOMIC & CULTURAL OFFICE,
NEW ZEALAND
NAME：F. C. LIN
TITLE：REPRESENTATIVE

FOR THE NEW ZEALAND COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY OFFICE
NAME：M. BRIDGE
TITLE：DIRECTOR