Libya introduces substantial trademark renewal fees for foreign applicants

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

Libya introduces substantial trademark renewal fees for foreign applicants

Sponsored by

spoor-fisher-400px.png
Map of Libya.jpg

Jen Colantoni of Spoor & Fisher summarises Libya’s new $2,000 annual trademark renewal fee for foreign applicants and alerts brand owners to several strategic considerations

There has been an important development in Libya recently regarding trademark renewals, with the introduction of significant new fees for foreign applicants.

On renewal, foreign applicants now need to pay an official fee of $2,000 per annum. This payment can be made in one lump sum of $20,000 for the 10-year renewal period or in yearly instalments.

The authority for this development is Resolution No. 586 of 2024, dated November 27 2024, which was confirmed in a meeting involving Ministry of Economy and Trade officials on February 3 2025. The new fees apply to all renewals due after January 1 2025. At this stage, they are not being applied retrospectively.

The original notification also mentioned a requirement to submit a “financial statement” at the time of renewal. It is understood that this applies only to local applicants and is not a requirement for foreign applicants.

Once the initial renewal fee is paid, the renewal will be published, but it is not currently clear whether the new renewal fees include the publication fee or whether this will be a supplemental cost.

There is a grace period of six months for payment of the initial renewal fee and, if paid in instalments, the subsequent fees must be paid on or before the annual anniversary of the renewal date.

Considerations relating to the new scheme

There are frequent changes in leadership at the Libyan Trademarks Office, which often result in different practices.

The new fees have caused much concern among practitioners in the region and, while it is by no means certain, it remains a possibility that they may be revoked or revised. On this basis, the author recommends that for renewals that are not immediately due, applicants wait and see how things develop over the coming months. For renewals that are due immediately, or in the near future, clients may be wise to opt for yearly payments, because if the full fee has been paid and the requirement is subsequently revoked, it is unlikely that it would be possible to obtain any refund.

The only alternative to paying the new fee at the current time would be to file a fresh application. While this would come with less cost, it has the obvious disadvantage of the loss of the original filing date.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Top talking points also included news of an appellate ruling concerning ‘Pisco’ and Indian drugmakers gearing up to launch generic versions of Ozempic as Novo Nordisk’s patent expires
The government’s keenly awaited view on AI and copyright has positive themes but leaves rights owners wanting, says Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard
While IP Australia’s updated manual could be favourable to computer-implemented inventions, stakeholders would like to see whether a consistent and reliable standard is followed during actual examination
UKIPO will remain a competitive option as long as efficient service continues
A future opt-out has not been ruled out, but practitioners warn that the UK could fall behind in the AI race
US patent lawyers say they are increasingly advising clients on China strategies as corporations seek to gain leverage in enforcement, licensing, and supply chain management
Mike Rueckheim reunites with 12 of his former Winston & Strawn colleagues as King & Spalding continues aggressive hiring streak
As global commerce continues to expand through e-commerce platforms and digital marketplaces, protecting brands has become a growing challenge for organisations worldwide. Counterfeiting, intellectual property infringement, and online brand abuse are increasing across industries, making brand protection strategies a critical priority for businesses.
Henrik Holzapfel and Chuck Larsen of McDermott Will & Schulte explain why a Court of Appeal ruling could promote access to justice and present a growth opportunity for litigation finance
A co-partner in charge says the UK prosecution teams are a ‘vital’ part of the firm’s offering, while praising a key injunction win
Gift this article