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 2025

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 Jeremy Hertzog explains how his team worked through a huge amount of disclosure from Adidas and what victory means for the firm
Evarist Kameja and Hadija Juma at Bowmans explain why a new law in Tanzania marks a significant shift in IP enforcement
In the wake of controversy surrounding Banksy’s recent London mural, AJ Park’s Thomas Huthwaite and Eloise Calder delve into the challenges street artists face in protecting their works and rights
Alex Levkin, founder of iPNOTE, discusses reshaping the filing industry through legal tech, and why practitioners’ advice should stretch beyond immediate legal needs
Cohausz & Florack, together with Krieger Mes & Graf von der Groeben, have taken action against Amazon on behalf of three VIA LA licensors
In the fourth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss unconscious bias in the IP workplace and how to address it
Greg Munt, who has moved from Griffith Hack to James & Wells after four decades, hails his new firm’s approach to client service
Practitioners warn that closing the Denver regional office could trigger a domino effect, threatening local innovation and access to IP resources
Law firms are rethinking litigation strategies after USPTO director John Squires said he would take control of PTAB challenges
News of Singapore planning to streamline the licensing framework for foreign law firms and a partnership between Avanci and Xprize were also among the top talking points
Gift this article