On 4 November 2026, the Government announced its plans to reform the UK designs framework, following the UKIPO consultation at the end of 2025. The full consultation response set out targeted changes to registered and unregistered designs, intended to modernise protection, improve confidence in registrations and make enforcement more accessible. You can find the full response here. 

What protection is available now?

Registered designs require an application to the UKIPO and must be new and have individual character, whereas unregistered protection arises automatically where the relevant requirements are met. However, there are two distinct UK unregistered design regimes:

• UK unregistered design right protects original shape and configuration, but not surface decoration. It can last for up to 15 years, although a shorter period applies where products are marketed.

• Supplementary unregistered design (“SUD”), derived from EU law, protects appearance, including surface decoration, for three years. Disclosure is central to establishing this right.

As we explained in our earlier article on IP and Brexit, these rights have different requirements and scopes. The Government intends to retain both, rather than replace them with a single unregistered right. It will explore harmonising qualification requirements and protection periods. Although a 10-year term attracted support, economic impacts will be assessed before any change. 

Greater scrutiny of registered designs

Currently, the UK IPO does not carry out a novelty search when examining a registered design application and as such, registration does not necessarily mean that a design is valid. A third party may subsequently challenge it for lacking novelty or individual character. The consultation highlighted misuse of this system, including registrations based on competitors’ photographs or well-known products, followed by takedown notices against legitimate sellers on online marketplaces.

The Government plans to give the registrar powers to search and examine for novelty and individual character in selected applications, guided by criteria. This change should reduce the burden of challenging invalid registrations while preserving the system’s speed and relatively low cost. Applicants should still consider earlier designs carefully as examination will not guarantee validity.

The UK IPO will also undertake further work on what constitutes bad faith and the evidence needed to establish it, before deciding whether to introduce a specific provision. Proposals for a two-stage registration system, an opposition process and an observation period have been dropped.

More time before publication

The deferment period is to increase from the current 12 months to a statutory 30 months, aligning with the EU and Hague systems. Both registration and publication will remain deferred, although limited application details, including the applicant’s name and filing date, are intended to be published online.

This will give businesses longer to keep designs confidential while preparing for launch, although the extended period is not yet available, so existing deadlines remain important.

Digital designs

The Government intends to amend the definitions of a ‘design’ and a ‘product’ to clarify that designs containing animation, movement or transitions can qualify for registered design protection. It also intends to extend the rights conferred by a registered design to cover creating, downloading, sharing or distributing media or software which records the design. This is intended to address digital uses, including files that enable a product to be made.

Computer-generated designs remain a separate area of ongoing work. The existing legal framework will be maintained while the Government monitors AI use and considers the most appropriate way forward.

Unregistered design disclosure

Although no major changes to the UK’s unregistered design systems are planned, SUD protection is intended to be extended to arise following disclosure anywhere in the world. This would change the existing territorial disclosure framework and could be significant for businesses launching products at overseas trade shows or online. It would not, however, itself secure protection in other countries. Until the reform is implemented, the timing and location of first disclosure still require careful consideration.

Enforcement

The Government does not intend to introduce criminal sanctions for infringement of unregistered designs, concluding that sufficiently robust evidence for a balanced and proportionate criminal remedy has not been provided. 

There will be further consideration of allowing straightforward, lower-value registered design infringement cases into the IPEC small claims track. Registered design claims are currently outside that track. A change could make enforcement more proportionate for smaller disputes, but access has not yet been extended.

What should businesses do now?

For now, businesses should review their design portfolios, retain evidence of creation and disclosure, and consider registration before launching important products. The proposals offer opportunities, but they do not remove the need to identify which rights protect a design and where protection is required.

If you would like to discuss how these developments may affect your business, please contact Simon Miles or your usual contact in the Intellectual Property team here at Edwin Coe.