Long-awaited regulation on non-use cancellation actions of the trademarks published

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

Long-awaited regulation on non-use cancellation actions of the trademarks published

Sponsored by

MorogluArseven_Turkey2.png

Moroğlu Arseven talk about the long-awaited regulation on non-use cancellation actions of the trademarks published

The long-anticipated amendments to the Regulation on the Implementation of the Industrial Property Law (“the Regulation”), addressing non-use cancelation action proceedings, were published in the Official Gazette on March 15, 2025, and numbered 32842 and have entered into force. These amendments provide much-needed clarity on non-use cancellation actions, a crucial tool for clearing unused trademarks from the registry.

Background

The Industrial Property Law No. 6769 (“the Law”), enacted in 2017, transferred the authority for non-use cancelation from the courts to the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office (“TPTO”) as of January 10, 2024. This reform was widely welcomed by the IP community as it aimed to make cancellation processes faster and more efficient.

While the TPTO began accepting non-use cancellation filings in mid-2024, the absence of detailed procedures caused delays. The amendment of the Regulation now establishes a clear framework for handling these requests.

Key Highlights of the Amendment of the Regulation

1. Filing Process:

  • Non-use cancellation requests must be submitted to the TPTO using a signed form, specifying:

    - Trademark registration number.

    - Goods/services in question.

    - If cancellation is sought as of a specific date, this date must also be specified.

  • Proof of payment of the cancellation fee is required for processing the request.

  • A separate request must be filed for each trademark registration.

2. Proof of Use:

  • Trademark owners must demonstrate genuine and serious use of their trademark in Türkiye for the goods/services subject to the request.

  • Use initiated within three months before the request will be disregarded, if deemed an attempt to avoid cancellation.

3. Deadlines and Responses:

  • If deficiencies in the non-use request are not corrected within one month, the application will be rejected.

  • The TPTO grants a one-month period to trademark owners to respond to cancellation requests, with an optional one-month extension.

  • The TPTO may request additional evidence and information from both parties, with a one-month deadline for responses. If no response is provided, the application will proceed based on the available evidence.

4. Cancellation Fee:

  • The cancellation fee consists of a fee of the TPTO and an escrow fee.

  • Escrow fee is paid to the winning party, if it is asked from the TPTO within ten years as of finalization of the cancelation decision.

5. Withdrawal of Requests:

  • Cancellation requests can be withdrawn before the TPTO issues a decision.

  • Refunds for the escrowed portion of the fee are available upon withdrawal.

What’s Next?

Although the TPTO began accepting non-use cancellation filings in mid-2024, it has not yet started examining these requests. With the new Regulation in place, as of May 2025 the TPTO started notifying trademark owners whose trademarks are challenged with non-use cancellation actions. The TPTO is expected to begin processing applications soon.

This development is a major step toward streamlining the cancellation process, ensuring that unused trademarks no longer block the registry. While the Regulation addresses many procedural uncertainties, additional updates or guidelines are expected to emerge as the TPTO gains experience in implementing the framework.

The amendments mark a significant turning point for IP rights holders, providing clearer procedures and fostering more efficient resolutions for non-use cancellation cases. The text of the amendments to the regulation, which is available only in Turkish can be accessed via the following link.

Author: Ece Berkman - Partner

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Rebekah Gay discusses overcoming self-doubt, supporting the next generation of women lawyers, and how changing client demands are reshaping IP practice
New filing data suggests Germany's grip on UPC litigation remains strong, while Bardehle Pagenberg, Arnold Ruess, Hogan Lovells and Carpmaels notch up notable cases
In 27 years, KASS has expanded to seven countries in southeast Asia and is now eyeing further growth opportunities. Its CEO shares her perspective
Mine Güner discusses bridging law and business, taking the initiative, and why Taylor Swift helped put copyright on the map
Cindy Goh discusses why she launched Cheang & Ariff's IP department, the improving litigation environment in Malaysia and what to consider when using AI
Increased focus on adding patent litigation depth to the firm’s Dallas office was behind the boutique’s most recent hires
IPH's Canadian acquisitions are paying off on paper, but a couple of strong years may not be enough to show that the group's strategy has truly won over the market
Examiner statistics could help patent prosecution practitioners tailor strategies, turning an area of high variability into a potential competitive advantage
The England and Wales High Court’s ruling in Accord v Novartis may not rewrite the law on plausibility, but it does signal a pragmatic approach that could provide greater certainty for life sciences innovators
Firms with established sports relationships and specialised expertise are well positioned to capture the market’s expanded pool of IP work
Gift this article