All material subject to strictly enforced copyright laws. © 2022 Managing IP is part of the Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC group.

Turkey: Registration no longer constitutes legitimate use defence in Turkey

Turkey has welcomed the new Intellectual Property Code (the IP Code) numbered 6769. This came into force on January 10 2017.

One of the major changes in the new IP Code is an explicit provision in Article 155 preventing later dated IP registrations being submitted as a defence in infringement actions.

Before the IP Code, there was established case law from the Court of Appeals stating that use of a registered IP right could not be prevented until the invalidation of the right was obtained. This case law resulted in de facto immunity for infringers allowing them to safely continue their infringements. In particular, the design registration system (which is rather quick as there was no ex-officio examination) was severely abused by infringers, and they obtained design registrations for the infringing packaging or infringing products. These registrations allowed them to safely use the infringing items until the end of the invalidation proceedings (at the minimum between one and two years).

As a result of the difficulties posed by case law for an effective fight against infringers, Article 155 of the IP Code has been welcomed.

So far, the courts have been hesitant when it comes to decisions, particularly in matters concerning preliminary injunction (PI) requests in infringement actions where the defendant holds a registered IP right. Interpretation of this Article by first instance courts has been rather strict for PI requests, and they have been rejected simply due to the need for an examination on the merits of the file which has resulted in continued use by infringers even in obvious cases of bad faith registrations. Recently the Bakırköy IP Court refused a PI request on the same ground, and this was appealed before the district court. The district court, by clearly referring to Article 155 of the IP Code, revoked the decision of the first instance court and rendered a PI order where the defendant was clearly acting in bad faith. We believe that this decision will guide first instance courts on the interpretation of the Article when it comes to PI requests and will allow trade mark owners to protect their trade marks against infringers by obtaining a PI order, even when a registered IP right exists.

Nevertheless, there will need to be a balance in the implementation of the regulation since the change introduced into the new IP Code rule also means that the risk of an infringement claim exists for trade marks which were registered in good faith.

Hande Hançar Çelik

Berrin Dinçer

Gün + PartnersKore Şehitleri Cad. 17Zincirlikuyu 34394İstanbul, TurkeyTel: + (90) (212) 354 00 00Fax: + (90) (212) 274 20

More from across our site

Counsel from Blackbird, Unified Patents, two other companies and a law firm debate what new ways to avoid Fintiv mean for petitioners and patent owners
Counsel at six companies say experience, technical expertise and persuasion are some of the most important skills at the board
Nokia beats Oppo in Germany; Australia and EPO to continue PPH; Ed Sheeran nets nearly £1m in legal fees; Google backs down in €500m French appeal
Brand owners say Amazon’s new anti-counterfeit team up is welcome but warn that such partnerships are often made on the e-commerce platform’s terms
Counsel say the government's policy drop and the result of Philips v Thales at the ITC or Federal Circuit could change the power balance in SEP matters
In-house counsel, experienced authors and a former EPO judge speak to Managing IP on the value of amicus briefs and what makes them good
Managing IP’s conference touched on topics including IoT licensing, trade secret strategies and AI inventorship
An appeal court confirmed Peppa Pig characters had been infringed, and overturned a March decision that denied relief owing to sanctions
The Unified Patent Court has lifted public access blocks on judgments but kept them for pleadings and evidence in the final version of its Rules of Procedure
Ukranian soldier Roman Gribov, an EUTM applicant, has won control of another application for the phrase that went viral in February
We use cookies to provide a personalized site experience.
By continuing to use & browse the site you agree to our Privacy Policy.
I agree