Turkey: Patent and Trademark Office publishes New Trademark Examination Guideline

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Turkey: Patent and Trademark Office publishes New Trademark Examination Guideline

The Turkish Patent and Trademark Office (the office) published the New Trademark Examination Guideline (guideline) on September 30 2019. The guideline defines the criteria for the examination of trademark applications on absolute grounds within the scope of the Industrial Property Code (IP Code) that came into force in 2017.

The guideline aims to update the previous guideline which was in force from 2011, clarify the principles of absolute grounds for refusal that are explained in the IP Code and provide consistency in office decisions.

The guideline consists of 379 pages and includes a great number of examples encompassing the decisions of the office and the courts, as well as recent developments in the EU. In particular, Article 5/1(c) regarding descriptiveness and Article 5/1(ç) regarding indistinguishable similarity to a senior trademark or trademark application are discussed in detail, providing various examples.

The key points of the guideline can be summarised as follows:

  • Since graphical representation is not required, it is enough to upload videos and voice recordings for applications for sound marks. For colour mark applications, the section for the colour example must be filled out fully and the "Pantone" colour code must be indicated.

  • When evaluating the trademark applications for "distinctiveness" and "descriptiveness", i) the trademark to be registered should be evaluated together with the goods and services that are the subject of the application; ii) the application should be evaluated as a whole; iii) the perception of the target consumers should be taken into consideration.

  • While the ex officio similarity evaluation is conducted by the office for the same or indistinguishable trademarks i) if there are two composite marks under evaluation, the overall impression that the marks leave should be taken into consideration, ii) if there is one composite and one non-composite mark under evaluation, the evaluation should be made upon the distinctive elements, iii) the distinctiveness level of the trademarks such as low-middle-high should be taken into consideration while the protection scope is determined.

The office, in its announcement, stated that this is a living document and should be updated occasionally according to changes in practice and evaluation. We believe that this detailed work will clarify the principles of absolute grounds for refusal and provide consistency in the office's decisions.

kose-mutlu-yildirim.jpg

Mutlu Yıldırım Köse


Gün + PartnersKore Şehitleri Cad. 17Zincirlikuyu 34394İstanbul, TurkeyTel: + (90) (212) 354 00 00Fax: + (90) (212) 274 20 95gun@gun.av.trgun.av.tr

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Partner Rob Jacob unveils plans to offer a beginning-to-end trademark service, how to make prosecution profitable, and why IP ‘buy-in’ from the CEO stands the firm in good stead
Sponsored by CAS
CAS provides practical pointers on how intellectual property and R&D teams can work in tandem to unlock tangible benefits and avoid wasted spend
Sponsored by CAS
CAS explores how AI is transforming intellectual property, from inventorship and copyright disputes to new demands on patent attorneys
Sponsored by That.Legal
Gillian Tan of That.Legal discusses a recent decision by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore and what it reveals about the evidential burden in bad-faith trademark claims
Attorneys at Di Blasi, Parente & Associados share how the protection of trade secrets strengthens innovation by bringing together legal practice, regulatory developments, and established international references
Jin Ooi, who joins as a partner today, said he is excited to offer a ‘rounded’ IP service as the firm deepens its litigation expertise in the UK and Europe
As generics celebrate, practitioners believe innovator companies should brace for an ‘uphill battle’ when trying to prove induced infringement
A team from Cooley shares how they overturned a massive damages award by emphasising that the opposing company’s trade secrets claims were time-barred
Sponsored by Licks Attorneys
Eduardo Hallak, Rafaella Oliveira, and Laís Souza of Licks Attorneys explain how the provision operates in practice, highlighting evidential hurdles and best practices for patent applicants
Sponsored by Liu, Shen & Associates
Chunyu Cui and Ziqing Wu of Liu, Shen & Associates say recent trends in China’s intellectual property courts indicate alignment with international standards and send a clear signal to the global market
Gift this article