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

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

Partner Rob Jacob unveils plans to offer a beginning-to-end trademark service, how to make prosecution profitable, and why IP ‘buy-in’ from the CEO stands the firm in good stead
Sponsored by CAS
CAS provides practical pointers on how intellectual property and R&D teams can work in tandem to unlock tangible benefits and avoid wasted spend
Sponsored by CAS
CAS explores how AI is transforming intellectual property, from inventorship and copyright disputes to new demands on patent attorneys
Sponsored by That.Legal
Gillian Tan of That.Legal discusses a recent decision by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore and what it reveals about the evidential burden in bad-faith trademark claims
Attorneys at Di Blasi, Parente & Associados share how the protection of trade secrets strengthens innovation by bringing together legal practice, regulatory developments, and established international references
Jin Ooi, who joins as a partner today, said he is excited to offer a ‘rounded’ IP service as the firm deepens its litigation expertise in the UK and Europe
As generics celebrate, practitioners believe innovator companies should brace for an ‘uphill battle’ when trying to prove induced infringement
A team from Cooley shares how they overturned a massive damages award by emphasising that the opposing company’s trade secrets claims were time-barred
Sponsored by Licks Attorneys
Eduardo Hallak, Rafaella Oliveira, and Laís Souza of Licks Attorneys explain how the provision operates in practice, highlighting evidential hurdles and best practices for patent applicants
Sponsored by Liu, Shen & Associates
Chunyu Cui and Ziqing Wu of Liu, Shen & Associates say recent trends in China’s intellectual property courts indicate alignment with international standards and send a clear signal to the global market
Gift this article