Greece prepares for trademark reform

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

Greece prepares for trademark reform

greece-trademark-reform-min-final.jpg

In the latest international briefing for Greece, Manolis Metaxakis evaluates upcoming reforms to trade mark law in the country

A new law on trademarks will soon come into effect in Greece, implementing Trademark Directive No. 2015/2436. Although this is definitely good news, there are a few difficulties in parts of the relevant law, where the mere implementation of the Trademark Directive is deemed insufficient. For instance, according to Article 47 of the bill, which is not an implementing provision, the Trademark Office (administrative authority) as well as the administrative courts are the competent authorities for trade mark matters, including oppositions, revocations and invalidity proceedings. On the other hand, the civil courts have exclusive jurisdiction to rule upon infringement actions.

According to the same bill, a non-use defence will now be available to the defendant in infringement proceedings. More specifically, Article 40 of the bill, provides that the proprietor of a trade mark shall be entitled to prohibit the use of a sign, only to the extent that the proprietor's rights are not liable to be revoked on the basis of non-use at the time when the infringement action is brought. If the defendant so requests, the proprietor of the trade mark shall furnish proof that, during the five-year period preceding the date of bringing the action, the trade mark has been put to genuine use in connection with the goods or services in respect of which it is registered and which are cited as justification for the action, or that there are proper reasons for non-use, provided that the registration procedure of the trade mark has not, at the date of bringing the action, been completed under five years ago.

Do the Greek courts have jurisdiction to rule upon a trademark's non-use? Article 47 says "no", while Article 40 says, "yes, for the needs of the infringement action under consideration." Although it is true that the bill does not introduce a mechanism identical to the one relating to EUTMs enforced in Greece, where specialised IP courts do have jurisdiction to rule upon cancellation and invalidity claims, it is equally true that it is departing from the long-lasting division mechanism applicable in Greece. In purely legal terms, departing is good, as long as you know where you want to go.

metaxakis.jpg

Manolis Metaxakis

Patrinos & Kilimiris

7, Hatziyianni Mexi Str.

GR-11528 Athens

Greece

Tel: +30210 7222906, 7222050

Fax: +30210 7222889

info@patrinoskilimiris.com

www.patrinoskilimiris.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

AI, cybersecurity and data practice group will provide clients with legal guidance around AI alongside a 'deep technical foundation’ in IP
Lawyers at Vondst and Biopatents say a ruling concerning the protected status of trade secrets could see the UPC flooded with requests to prevent access to confidential information
Sharad Vadehra of Kan & Krishme discusses why older IP firms still have an edge over up-and-coming boutiques and how the firm is using AI to provide quick and cost-effective service
Lawyers at Appleyard Lees share how they picked apart a plant breeder’s infringement claims concerning the ‘Tango’ mandarin
A further decision on long-arm status, and a new hire for Pentarc in Germany from Taylor Wessing were also among top developments
The US decision marks a rare grant of a request under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act in a patent case
Stobbs has applied to strike out a contempt of court application filed against the firm and two of its lawyers
With trademark volumes surging, trademark teams need to think beyond traditional clearance searches, towards a continuous, intelligence-led workflow, says Meghan Medeiros of Corsearch
Brazilian in-house counsel say law firms’ technology investments have not translated into tangible benefits, meaning tech use is a minor factor when selecting advisers
A lack of comfort among some salaried partners shows why law firms must actively foster inclusion, not merely focus on diversity mandates
Gift this article