The Constitutional Court has ruled that Article 42/1-c of Decree Law no. 556 on the Protection of Trademarks (the Trademark Decree Law) is contrary to the provisions of the Turkish Constitution.
In general, Article 42 sets out the grounds for the cancellation of a trademark. Article 42/1-c refers to Article 14, in which the obligation to use a trademark is regulated. In line with this obligation if, within a period of five years from registration, the trademark has not been used without a justifiable reason or if use has been ceased for an uninterrupted period of five years, the trademark shall be invalidated.
As we reviewed the background of the Constitutional Court’s decision, we found that Article 42/1-c was brought to the attention of the Constitutional Court by the 4th Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights Civil Court’s judge.
In the dispute, examined by the first instance court, the plaintiff had asserted that the respondent’s trademark constituted trademark infringement. Therefore, the plaintiff requested the cessation of the infringement, monetary and moral damages and the cancellation of the respondent’s trademark. As a counter-action, the respondent requested the cancellation of the plaintiff’s trademark based on non-use.
To continue reading, you need a subscription to WIPR. Start a subscription to WIPR for £455.
In-house feature articles, the archive and expert comment require a paid subscription. Subscribe now.
Want to give it a try? We are offering a two week free trial to the WIPR website – register and select “Free Trial” to begin access to the full WIPR archive and read the latest news, features and expert comment. Begin your free trial here.
Is your 2 week free trial about to end? Upgrade to a 12 month subscription for £455 now.
If you have already subscribed please login.
If you have any technical issues please email James Lynn on email@example.com.
trademarks; Trademark Decree Law