Side effects of an effective trademark treatment in Greece

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

Side effects of an effective trademark treatment in Greece

Sponsored by

patrinos-logo.png
greece-5944176.jpg

Manolis Metaxakis of Patrinos & Kilimiris says the Law on Trademarks now in force is a radical and healthy development, but uncertainty remains for trademark owners and legal practitioners regarding transitional issues

The new Law on Trademarks enacted in Greece (Law No 4679/2020) is not regarded as a mere implementation of Directive (EU) 2015/2436. In fact, it is a radical legal tool because all invalidity actions of all types – that is, all requests of invalidity/revocation and counter-actions of invalidity/cancellation – are initially, or on appeal, to be decided before the civil courts. According to the law previously applicable, all requests of invalidity/revocation were cases for the administrative courts to decide.

This is a shift towards a promising direction, taking into account that there are specialised panels in the Greek civil courts that maintain exclusive jurisdiction to decide on trademark cases, unlike the divisions of the administrative courts that were competent to hear the same types of cases under the Greek law previously applicable.

However, it is commonly accepted that no one is perfect, and nor is the Greek Law on Trademarks that is now in force. In particular, an issue has arisen as to the proper court to decide on appeals against decisions delivered by the Trademarks Administrative Commission on invalidity/revocation requests that were filed before the new law came into effect.

The transitional rules of the new Law on Trademarks provides that said cases shall be decided according to the law previously applicable. In this regard, there are two theories:

  • This type of case must be decided on the substantive provisions of the law previously applicable but under an appeal that must be filed before the civil courts, as provided by the present law; and

  • This type of case must be decided according to the law previously applicable in all respects; i.e., as regards the substance, as well as the competence, of the relevant court, meaning the administrative court.

The specialised IP court in Athens (a civil court) delivered a judgment on this issue in June 2023, under which the latter view was accepted. In particular, it was held that the civil courts have no jurisdiction to rule on appeal invalidity/revocation requests filed and decided by the Trademarks Administrative Commission before the enactment of the Law on Trademarks that is currently applicable.

This newborn issue is far from being regarded as resolved and much uncertainty is still present, which is not good news for trademark owners and legal practitioners.

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