EU trade mark deal struck, so what happens now?

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

EU trade mark deal struck, so what happens now?

Finally, after five years of debate, there is an agreement on reform to the EU Trade Marks Directive and CTM Regulation. While there is a cautious welcome for what has been agreed, we are likely to enter a new period of adaptation and scrutiny

EU flag

The so-called trilogue of the European Council, Commission and Parliament yesterday struck a deal on reforms to trade mark protection in Europe. As we reported yesterday, the substance of the reforms is probably less than many trade mark users hoped, and the latter stages of the negotiations were characterised by debates about money. There is also a lot of detail that still needs to be fleshed out.

Having said that, initial reaction to the agreement among trade mark groups has been cautiously positive. INTA President J Scott Evans (right) blogged that the Association “welcomes a number of aspects of the agreement” including the reduction in renewal fees, the provisions on goods in transit and the implementation of the IP Translator decision on classification of goods and services. But he added that there were elements of the deal that INTA would be monitoring.

Tove Graulund of Graulund Consulting, who chairs the MARQUES trade mark reform task force, added that elements of the agreement showed that users’ concerns had been listened to, in particular the plans to ensure all EU IP offices have administrative proceedings for trade mark cancellation and the financial incentive to apply for a CTM in just one class, rather than three.

However, EU member states have also got much of what they wanted from the negotiations. Notably, once the reform is implemented, at least €5 of every €100 received in fees by OHIM (which will be renamed the EU IP Office) will be “offset” to national offices to promote trade mark harmonisation. If OHIM continues to run at a significant surplus, this could increase to €10 in every €100. A further €15 in every €100 is earmarked for cooperation projects. That adds up to some nice extra revenue for national IP offices.

OHIM new office

Does that mean everyone is happy? The answer is that there is probably enough in the deal, based on what we have been told about it so far, to ensure the remaining formalities will be passed and it will lead to changes to trade mark practice in Europe.

That will end a process that began more than five years ago, with the Max Planck study (see our topic page for all the ups and downs of the process). But it will mark the beginning of another phase, which will be characterised by adaptation and observation.

Those who will have to adapt are trade mark practitioners and IP offices in Europe, though some countries will see bigger changes than others. And in truth for many trade mark owners and applicants the changes will be relatively minor and will have little impact on their day-to-day practice.

Meanwhile, trade mark users groups will be monitoring closely what happens to the money. The principle of diverting money away from OHIM was widely opposed, but that battle is now lost. Instead, users (some of whom are observers on OHIM’s Board) will want to see evidence that the money is staying in the IP system and being used to improve services for trade mark owners. IP offices in member states are on notice.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Amita Haylock discusses building an integrated Asia practice as clients increasingly demand that firms combine IP, technology and data expertise
François Pochart, Grégoire Desrousseaux and Lionel Martin, long-standing figures in the firm’s patent litigation team, are set to help launch a Paris-based litigation offering
The Unitary Patent has passed 100,000 registrations, but new data raises the question of whether 30% uptake is a ceiling or a staging post for further growth, say Michael Nielsen and Darren Smyth of EIP and Andrew Samm at Patently
The new generation of in-house IP leaders want commercial judgment, accessibility and flexibility, with AI raising expectations around both fees and delivery
The firm launched a San Diego office earlier this month, but California investment and expansion is far from complete
The industry’s response to AI requires an unfamiliar ingredient as firms battle to shape their futures
The firm is looking beyond replacing recently departed talent, betting instead on senior leaders to strengthen and expand its patent litigation platform
Olga Partington, director in Sterne Kessler’s biotechnology and chemical practice group, shares why a patent's vulnerability peaks when it is young, rather than when it is most valuable, under the PTAB's new framework
IP experts gathered in San Francisco last week to discuss the changing global SEP landscape and new licensing models for AI infrastructure
SKW Schwarz partner Daniel Kendziur explains how new green claims rules are changing his workload and bringing him into direct contact with marketing, PR and government affairs teams
Gift this article