32. Information prejudicial to defence of Brunei Darussalam or safety of public

if the application is made under this Act, it will be held in abeyance after the formal requirements of this Act and the rules have been met and will not proceed to be processed in accordance with section 29 until the directions are revoked under subsection (4)(e);

if it is an international application for a patent, a copy of it shall not be sent to the International Bureau or any international searching authority appointed under the Patent Co-operation Treaty.

the Attorney General shall, on receipt of the notice, consider whether the publication of the application or the publication or communication of the information in question would be prejudicial to the defence of Brunei Darussalam or the safety of the public;

if the Attorney General determines under paragraph (a) that the publication or communication of that information would be prejudicial to the safety of the public, he shall notify the Registrar who shall continue his directions under subsection (2) until they are revoked under paragraph (e);

if the Attorney General determines under paragraph (a) that the publication of the application or the publication or communication of that information would be prejudicial to the defence of Brunei Darussalam or the safety of the public, he shall

if on consideration of an application at any time it appears to the Attorney General that the publication of the application or the publication or communication of the information contained in it would not, or would no longer, be prejudicial to the defence of

on receipt of such a notice the Registrar shall revoke the directions and may, subject to such conditions (if any) as he thinks fit, extend the time for doing anything required or authorised to be done by or under this Act in connection with the application, whether or not that time has previously expired.

if while the directions are in force the invention is worked by (or with the written authorisation of or to the order of) a

the working were use made by section 58;

the application had been published at the end of the prescribed period or at the time the directions were revoked, whichever is earlier; and

a patent had been granted for the invention at the time the application is brought in order for the grant of a patent (taking the terms of the patent to be those of the application as it stood at the time it was so brought in order); and

if it appears to the Attorney General that the applicant for the patent has suffered hardship while the directions were in force, the Attorney General may make such payment (if any) by way of compensation to the applicant as appears to the Attorney General to be reasonable having regard to the inventive merit and utility of the invention, the purpose for which it is designed and any other relevant circumstances.