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

Armstrong Teasdale’s Jim Heinen Jr discusses the challenge of balancing billables, business development and family life and explains why not all patent lawyers are science nerds
From cross-border jurisdiction to the end of the transitional period, Powell Gilbert’s Ioana Sabau and Bryce Matthewson predict the biggest talking points ahead
A wave of office launches and lateral hires reflect the draw of patent disputes, but booming AI, semiconductor and data centre markets are offering an even bigger IP opportunity
The hire of Frederick Nicolle as a partner continues Pinsent Masons' expansion while reducing Simmons’ patent prosecution offering in London to zero
The expansion into Granada forms part of a national ‘decentralisation’ strategy focused on providing proximity to research and tech businesses away from traditional hubs
Three successive wins have got the firm eyeing additional opportunities as ITC work booms
While many firms remain focused on generative AI, recent hires and practice launches suggest the next battle may be for lawyers who understand how AI is moving into the physical world
The explosion of data centres has prompted patent pool operators to create new licensing opportunities
The court struck out copyright claims brought by Ladbrokes owner Entain, saying that ownership details should have been completed before litigation began
Düsseldorf has overtaken Munich as the UPC's busiest division, while firms including Winston Taylor, Clifford Chance, and Hoyng Rokh Monegier featured in disputes involving Abbott, Essity, Amazon and Hurom
Gift this article