France: France introduces new trademark law

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

France: France introduces new trademark law

Sponsored by

beau-de-lomenie.png
Hand of man signing signature filling in application form document

The new trademark law implementing the EU Directive has been applicable since December 11 and has introduced important changes.

The requirement of a graphic representation has been abandoned and a new official fees system is applicable to allow filing and renewing for one class only. Absolute grounds for refusal now include appellations of origin, geographical indications, traditional terms for wine, traditional guaranteed specialities and earlier plant variety denominations. Provisions relating to collective trademarks are also amended.

The opposition procedure is available for new prior rights: company names, commercial names, domain names and reputed trademarks.

It is also open to public entities in case there is an attempt on their name, image or repute or if there is a likelihood of confusion for the public. Opposition can also be filed against trademarks filed by an agent or representative without authorisation. Several earlier rights may be invoked in one opposition procedure.

Proof of use is now to be provided for the 5-year period preceding the application date of the opposed trademark and for all goods or services which serve as basis for the opposition.

New provisions relating to invalidity or revocation procedures entered into force on April 1 2020.  

The French PTO now has exclusive jurisdiction for actions based on absolute grounds or invalidity for non-use. No interest to act is required from the demanding party. The office shares jurisdiction with courts regarding actions based on relative grounds of invalidity. The courts remain competent when there is a connected issue of unfair competition, and remain exclusively competent regarding infringement actions, and investigative, interim or provisional measures.

The action for invalidity can be based on several grounds and/or rights. However, it is inadmissible if the prior trademark invoked was not used during the five year period preceding the date of the action except if there are proper reasons for non-use. It is also the case if this trademark has been registered for more than five years, and was not used during the five year period preceding the application date of the challenged trademark. Similar provisions apply to reputed trademarks or trademarks for which distinctiveness was acquired through use.

There is no more limitation period attached to invalidity actions, with the exception of actions based on well-known trademarks, for which there is a five year limitation period, except in the case of bad faith. However, in all cases, an invalidity action will be inadmissible if the applicant knew about the later registered trademark and tolerated its use for five years.

The French PTO has been working on the implementation of invalidation procedures by recruiting and training new people. Despite the emergency state brought about by COVID-19, they are available from April 1.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Eight years after its launch, members of the Australian patent firm’s Singapore office explain its growth strategy over the past year
Lawyers at Bowmans Kenya discuss the digital blind spots posed by the transition from physical ledgers to cloud databases and digital co-development models
The Powell Gilbert co-founder discusses the confidence required to launch a firm, building an enduring patent litigation practice and why developing the next generation has changed her measure of success
Cabinet M Oproiu’s Raluca Vasilescu explains why AI is changing what clients expect from patent attorneys, where the technology is overhyped and what the next generation will need to do differently
As clients demand more flexible fees and AI-driven efficiencies, IP firms are rethinking pricing without abandoning the value of their work
HG Law was formed largely by ex Fish & Neave lawyers who left after the latter's merger with Ropes & Gray; now those experiences are shaping its latest combination
David Rodrigues and Evan Lazerowitz – attorneys at Robinson & Cole – offer practical guidance on the steps a business might consider to preserve and maximise IP value before entering financial distress or insolvency
Daniel Law CEO Alicia Daniel-Shores may have stepped into a family business, but she has spent two decades building her own vision around technology and litigation
Law firms don't particularly like saying no to clients. Perhaps they should get better at it
The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
Gift this article