Turkey: Trade mark prosecution and opposition under the new IP 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

Turkey: Trade mark prosecution and opposition under the new IP Code

The New Turkish Industrial Property Code entered into force on January 10 2017. The IP Code replaces the Decree-laws pertaining to the protection of trade marks, patents, geographical indications and designs by unifying them into a single code.

Among other reforms, the trade mark chapter includes changes relating to prosecution and opposition procedures for trade marks. These are now in greater compliance with the relevant European Union directives.

First, the graphical representation criteria for signs to be registered as a trade mark has changed to "signs capable of being represented on the register in a manner which enables the competent authorities and the public to determine the clear and precise subject matter of the protection afforded to its proprietor". Further, "colours" and "sounds" have been explicitly stated under "signs" that can be registered as a "trade mark" for the first time. In addition, it has been explicitly stated that the signs that are not distinctive and which include geographical indications cannot be registered. Those were already accepted under the former legislation through interpretation but now they are clearly mentioned in the IP Code.

One of the major changes in trade mark prosecution is that the IP Code introduces the principle of co-existence into Turkish trade mark law. Accordingly, letters of consent from the senior trade mark/trade mark application owners will be acceptable in overcoming the citations of earlier senior identical or indistinguishably similar trade marks by the Turkish Patent and Trade Mark Office as an ex officio refusal ground.

The IP Code includes major changes relating to the opposition proceedings as well. First, the term for opposition for trade marks has been shortened to two months from three months. Further, during the opposition proceedings before the Office opponents will have to prove genuine use or produce justified reasons for non-use of their trade marks within the last five years that they cite as grounds for the opposition, if so requested by the applicant. Accordingly, if the opponent cannot prove genuine use or produce justified reasons for non-use, the opposition will be rejected.

There are also changes relating to opposition grounds. The protection of well-known trade marks in the meaning of Paris Convention, which was recently cancelled by the Constitutional Court, has been re-introduced as a relative opposition ground.

Finally, it is worth noting that for trade mark applications that were filed before January 10 2017, the former legislation, namely the Trademark Decree-Law, will still apply until their registration processes complete.

Uğur Aktekin

Mutlu Yıldırım Köse

Gün + Partners

Kore Şehitleri Cad. 17

Zincirlikuyu 34394

İstanbul, Turkey

Tel: + (90) (212) 354 00 00

Fax: + (90) (212) 274 20 95

gun@gun.av.tr

gun.av.tr

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

New filing data suggests Germany's grip on UPC litigation remains strong, while Bardehle Pagenberg, Arnold Ruess, Hogan Lovells and Carpmaels notch up notable cases
In 27 years, KASS has expanded to seven countries in southeast Asia and is now eyeing further growth opportunities. Its CEO shares her perspective
Mine Güner discusses bridging law and business, taking the initiative, and why Taylor Swift helped put copyright on the map
Cindy Goh discusses why she launched Cheang & Ariff's IP department, the improving litigation environment in Malaysia and what to consider when using AI
Increased focus on adding patent litigation depth to the firm’s Dallas office was behind the boutique’s most recent hires
IPH's Canadian acquisitions are paying off on paper, but a couple of strong years may not be enough to show that the group's strategy has truly won over the market
Examiner statistics could help patent prosecution practitioners tailor strategies, turning an area of high variability into a potential competitive advantage
The England and Wales High Court’s ruling in Accord v Novartis may not rewrite the law on plausibility, but it does signal a pragmatic approach that could provide greater certainty for life sciences innovators
Firms with established sports relationships and specialised expertise are well positioned to capture the market’s expanded pool of IP work
Gunjan Paharia discusses developing RIA, an AI platform built to draw on decades of institutional knowledge, support junior lawyers, and reshape how legal teams work
Gift this article