Statute Details
- Title: Trade Marks (Border Enforcement Measures Fees) Rules 2019
- Act Code: TMA1998-S749-2019
- Type: Subsidiary Legislation (SL)
- Authorising Act: Trade Marks Act (Cap. 332), specifically section 81B
- Commencement: 21 November 2019
- Enacting Formula / Maker: Made by the Minister for Finance
- Key Provisions (from extract): Section 1 (citation and commencement); Section 2 (definition of “seized goods”); Section 3 (fees payable to the Director-General)
- Schedule: “Fees” (fees payable in respect of matters listed in the first column)
- Current Version Status: Current version as at 27 Mar 2026 (per metadata)
- Latest Amendment Noted in Timeline: Amended by S 771/2023 (effective 1 Jan 2024)
What Is This Legislation About?
The Trade Marks (Border Enforcement Measures Fees) Rules 2019 (“the Rules”) set out the fee framework for certain administrative and enforcement activities connected to border enforcement of trade mark rights in Singapore. In practical terms, the Rules address the question: when customs or other authorised officers seize goods suspected of infringing trade marks, what fees are payable, to whom, and in respect of which enforcement-related matters?
Border enforcement measures are a key part of intellectual property protection. They allow the authorities to intercept suspected infringing goods at or near the border, before those goods enter the local market. However, border enforcement involves costs—such as handling, storage, inspection, and administrative processing. The Rules provide a structured mechanism for recovering those costs through statutorily specified fees.
Although the extract provided does not reproduce the full Schedule, the Rules clearly operate together with the Trade Marks Act (Cap. 332). The Rules are made under section 81B of the Trade Marks Act, which empowers the Minister to prescribe fees for border enforcement measures. The Rules therefore function as the “charging instrument” that translates enforcement processes into payable fees.
What Are the Key Provisions?
1. Citation and commencement (Rule 1)
Rule 1 establishes the formal name of the instrument and its effective date. The Rules are cited as the Trade Marks (Border Enforcement Measures Fees) Rules 2019 and come into operation on 21 November 2019. For practitioners, this matters when determining whether a fee regime applies to a particular seizure or enforcement event, especially where enforcement actions span dates around amendments.
2. Definition of “seized goods” (Rule 2)
Rule 2 defines “seized goods” as goods that were seized by an authorised officer under section 82(4) or section 93A(1) of the Trade Marks Act. This definition is critical because the fee provisions in section 3 are tied to “matters set out opposite” in the Schedule, and those matters are typically triggered by the seizure of goods. By anchoring the definition to specific statutory seizure powers, the Rules reduce ambiguity about which seizures attract the fee regime.
From a legal risk perspective, the definition also helps distinguish between different categories of border-related actions. For example, not every interaction at the border necessarily involves a formal “seizure” under the specified provisions. If goods are detained or handled in a manner that does not amount to a seizure under the referenced sections, the fee consequences may differ. Counsel advising rights holders or importers should therefore focus on the legal basis for the authorities’ action and confirm that it falls within the statutory definition.
3. Fees payable to the Director-General (Rule 3)
Rule 3 is the core charging provision. It provides that the fees specified in the second column of the Schedule are payable to the Director-General in respect of the matters set out opposite in the first column of the Schedule. In other words, the Schedule is the operative table: it links particular enforcement-related “matters” to specific fee amounts.
This structure is typical of fee rules: the Rules themselves establish the legal mechanism (who receives the fees and how the Schedule is applied), while the Schedule supplies the actual amounts. For practitioners, the practical takeaway is that fee liability will depend on matching the relevant “matter” in the Schedule to the corresponding fee in the second column. The Schedule therefore becomes essential evidence in any dispute about whether a particular fee is payable and whether it is correctly calculated.
4. The Schedule (fees for border enforcement measures)
The extract indicates that the Schedule contains “Fees” and that fees are specified in the second column. While the precise items and amounts are not included in the provided text, the Schedule is clearly intended to cover multiple scenarios within border enforcement. These may include, for instance, fees connected to administrative processing, handling, storage, or other steps that occur after seizure.
Practitioners should treat the Schedule as the authoritative source for fee amounts and fee triggers. In fee disputes, the Schedule will typically be the first document to consult. It may also be relevant for advising on budgeting and settlement strategy in matters involving suspected infringing goods.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
The Rules are structured in a short, functional format:
(a) Enacting Formula — states the legal basis for making the Rules, namely the powers conferred by section 81B of the Trade Marks Act, and identifies the maker (Minister for Finance).
(b) Part/Section 1: Citation and commencement — provides the name and commencement date.
(c) Part/Section 2: Definition — defines “seized goods” by reference to specific seizure provisions in the Trade Marks Act.
(d) Part/Section 3: Fees — sets out the payment obligation and directs the reader to the Schedule for the fee amounts and the matters to which they relate.
(e) The Schedule — contains the detailed fee table (matters in the first column and corresponding fees in the second column).
Notably, the Rules are not long and do not contain extensive procedural detail. Instead, they operate as a companion instrument to the Trade Marks Act, which contains the substantive border enforcement framework (including the seizure powers and the overall enforcement process). The Rules focus on the financial consequences of those enforcement steps.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The Rules apply to situations involving border enforcement measures under the Trade Marks Act, specifically where goods are seized by an authorised officer under the defined provisions (section 82(4) or section 93A(1)). In practice, the fee regime will be relevant to:
(i) Rights holders who initiate or benefit from border enforcement actions (depending on how the Trade Marks Act structures applications and requests);
(ii) Importers, consignees, or other affected parties whose goods are seized; and
(iii) The authorities administering the border enforcement system, including the Director-General to whom fees are payable.
While the Rules themselves do not spell out who ultimately bears the fees in every scenario, the payment obligation in section 3 indicates that fees are payable to the Director-General for the specified matters. In many IP border enforcement regimes, the costs are typically allocated through the Trade Marks Act’s enforcement framework—often involving undertakings, cost recovery, or administrative charges. Accordingly, practitioners should read the Rules together with the relevant provisions of the Trade Marks Act to determine the party responsible for paying the fees in a given case.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
Although the Rules are relatively concise, they are important because they translate enforcement activity into enforceable financial obligations. For rights holders, understanding the fee regime is essential for assessing the overall cost of border enforcement and for making informed decisions about whether to pursue enforcement actions. For importers and consignees, fee exposure can be a significant factor in negotiations, settlement, and risk management.
From an enforcement and compliance perspective, the Rules also promote administrative certainty. By specifying that fees are payable according to a Schedule and by identifying the Director-General as the recipient, the Rules reduce the scope for discretionary or ad hoc charging. This can be relevant in disputes where parties question whether a fee was properly imposed or whether the correct fee item applies.
Finally, the timeline information indicates that the Rules have been amended (notably by S 771/2023 effective 1 January 2024). Practitioners should therefore ensure they are consulting the correct version when advising on a matter. Fee amounts and fee triggers can change through amendments, and the date of seizure or the date of the relevant administrative step may determine which version applies.
Related Legislation
- Trade Marks Act (Cap. 332) — in particular sections 81B (power to make fees rules), 82(4) and 93A(1) (seizure powers referenced in the definition of “seized goods”)
- Trade Marks (Border Enforcement Measures) provisions within the Trade Marks Act — for the substantive border enforcement framework that the fee rules support
- S 771/2023 — amendment to the Trade Marks (Border Enforcement Measures Fees) Rules 2019 (effective 1 January 2024)
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Trade Marks (Border Enforcement Measures Fees) Rules 2019 for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.