Turkey: Letters of consent under the Turkish Industrial Property Code

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

Cookies Settings

Turkey: Letters of consent under the Turkish Industrial Property Code

Unlike many countries, Turkish trade mark law has had a rule since 1995 that a senior trade mark registration or application identical or indistinguishably similar to a junior trade mark application can be raised as an absolute ground for refusal if the goods/services are also identical or of the same type. The Turkish Industrial Property Code (the IP Code), which entered into force on January 10 2017, softened this rule, and in cases where an applicant submits a notarised document to the Trademark Office indicating that the owner of the prior registration agrees to the registration of the trade mark application that is identical or indistinguishably similar to a senior trade mark or trade mark application, then the junior application cannot be rejected on this ground.

This provision has widely been considered as a positive development for applicants seeking registration for new trade marks, whose applications were rejected due to the existence of senior trade marks that were registered for a long time but not in use.

In practice, in some instances, where the owners of senior trade marks are serious and legitimate businesses, this new provision has helped and the letter of consent mechanism has worked well. However, some opportunistic senior trade mark owners have started to use this provision as a tool for asking for unreasonable amounts of money from the applicants for giving the letter of consent, even if they do not use the trade marks. The only alternative to putting pressure on the owners of unused trade marks is filing a revocation action due to non-use before the IP courts. However, this does not really answer the needs of businesses who want to obtain the trade mark registration in a smooth and quick way, since court actions are usually lengthy and expensive. The solution to this problem lies in the IP Code. Pursuant to Articles 26 and 192, the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office (the office) will have the authority to process the application demanding revocation of trade marks due to non-use starting from January 2024.

We think that the positive effect of this new provision will be seen once the revocation demands due to non-use begin to be heard by the office. Until then, businesses may continue to have a hard time registering their trade marks due to unused trade marks blocking registration.

Uğur Aktekin

Pınar Arıkan


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

The firm reveals how its litigation strategies informed the arguments that took Masimo’s judgment past $818 million
The firm was rebuilding its IP practice through a string of patent hires and a Texas expansion, but its dissolution has put the newly built talent back into the market
AI can exploit longstanding gaps in copyright protection at remarkable speed, but EU law still provides tools to fight back, says Simon Hembt at Bird & Bird
The firm has tapped a local patent trio to establish a foothold in the market and broaden its national presence
New Asia-Pacific IP head Jonathan Chu is eyeing opportunities arising from Chinese technology licensing, overseas enforcement and increasingly IP-heavy cross-border deals
Europe’s largest intellectual property convention and trade fair is back: IP Service World 2026 takes place in Munich from November 23–25 – the 16th edition, with 1,400-plus attendees from 55-plus nations, 100-plus speakers, and 100-plus exhibitors. Three days. Two focused areas. One IP marketplace.
Mehmet Gün and Uğur Aktekin discuss four decades of change in Türkiye’s legal market, the firm’s commitment to independence and the challenge of building an institution that can outlast its founders
Boehringer Ingelheim has instructed a team from Kirkland, while Teva is being represented by Pinsent Masons
The Delhi High Court’s latest directions offer an opportunity to move beyond remedies against bad-faith registrations and address how suspicious applications are identified in the first place, says Fatima Baig at Lexlinc
Camilla Hamrin describes how the acquisition by Acapo Onsagers will impact Bergenstråhle’s trademark practice – and reflects on changes she has seen over 30 years in IP
Gift this article