In its 2010 review of Plant Breeder's Rights (PBR) Enforcement, the former Advisory Council on Intellectual Property (ACIP) recommended that the Plant Breeder's Rights Act be amended to clarify that harvested material that is also propagating material is to be considered as propagating material for the purposes of section 11 of the Plant Breeder's Rights Act, even if it is not being used for that purpose.
The government accepted ACIP's recommendation in June 2011, noting that this would ensure that Plant Breeder's Rights owners could require royalties on harvested grain under s11 rather than rely on private contracts or extended rights, which ACIP had some concerns about. This would also ensure that the definition of harvested material in the Plant Breeder's Rights Act is consistent with the Federal Court's decision in Cultivaust Pty Limited v Grain Pool Pty Limited  FCAFC 223.
On hold 04-Sept-2017
Reviewed 24 June 2021
IP Australia welcomes feedback and evidence on this issue to support possible further work.