Belgium: Changes following the new EU Trade Mark Directive

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

Belgium: Changes following the new EU Trade Mark Directive

The Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council of December 16 2015 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks was published in the Official Journal on December 23 2015 and entered into force on the 20th day following its publication date. Most of its provisions shall thus be implemented in national laws within a three-year deadline, that is by January 14 2019.

To implement the Directive, the Benelux Convention on Intellectual Property (BCIP) has to be reformed.

The major change will be the administrative procedure for revocation and invalidity. Even if a Protocol in this regard is in the process of approval by the Benelux states, it will have to be further modified to include, in particular, the new absolute and relative grounds of refusal provided by the Directive. To set up such procedures, member states have an extended deadline to implement this provision, until January 14 2023.

Among the other mandatory provisions, the new definition of signs registrable as trade marks, adopted for the EUTM, will also have to apply to Benelux trademarks. The criteria of graphic representation shall thus disappear.

The requirements in terms of classification are also mandatory provisions. The reformed BCIP shall thus reflect the rules defined by the IP Translator case: the goods and services shall be identified "with sufficient clarity and precision" and class headings may be used provided that they comply with the standards of clarity and precision.

The BCIP will also have to redefine the current collective trade marks, in order to fit the definitions set out by the Directive for collective and certification trade marks. Note that the collective trademark as defined by the BCIP should be regarded as a certification trade mark. The BCIP could alternatively add a new section on real collective trade marks next to the existing regime. The Benelux countries will have to make a choice with regards to the fees, since the system of fees per class (already adopted for the EUTM) is an optional provision.

Delaroque

Estelle Delaroque


Gevers & OresHolidaystraat, 5B-1831 Diegem - BrusselsBelgiumTel: +32 2 715 37 11Fax: +32 2 715 37 00www.gevers.eu

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

A decision on a licensing rate payable by Warner Bros and Paramount, and a survey outlining UK businesses’ lack of IP preparation ahead of launching abroad, were among other major talking points
A fresh wave of deals highlights why investors favour IP firms and why independent outfits may soon have to rethink their strategy
King & Spalding has now hired 15 partners from Winston Taylor and legacy firm Winston & Strawn in offices spanning Texas, San Francisco, and Chicago
Firm says its work with a biotech client could signal a sea change in how - and when - law firms enter the drug development process
Evan Lazerowitz, attorney in Robinson + Cole’s bankruptcy and reorganisation group, offers key takeaways for IP interested parties in bankruptcy and insolvency proceedings
While the UK sees heavy IP rankings movement, Germany’s new tiered UPC table signals a shift from early adoption to market maturity
In an exclusive interview, Bernard Ledeboer reveals how a Consolid-backed group of firms wants to expand across Europe, invest in AI and centralise operations to compete at the top tier
Not all private equity firms are the same, so leaders at four externally backed IP firms came together to discuss the frameworks they followed and how they ensured a cultural fit
Top-tier German and Spanish firms are among the advisers on a Europe-wide copyright and licensing tussle concerning the design of the track circuit in Madrid
Partners Alex Wilson and Andreas Kramer say bigger law firm rivals don’t necessarily gain by having a wider jurisdictional reach
Gift this article