Log in


Now in its twelfth year, Class 46 is dedicated to European trade mark law and practice. This weblog is written by a team of enthusiasts who want to spread the word and share their thoughts with others.

Want to receive Class 46 by email?
Click here subscribe for free.

Who we all are...
Anthonia Ghalamkarizadeh
Birgit Clark
Blog Administrator
Christian Tenkhoff
Fidel Porcuna
Gino Van Roeyen
Markku Tuominen
Niamh Hall
Nikos Prentoulis
Stefan Schröter
Tomasz Rychlicki
Yvonne Onomor
Who is entitled to EUROVENTILATORI in Turkey?
Euroventilatori International S.p.A. (EIS), which had no Turkish trade mark registration for its word mark EUROVENTILATORI in Turkey, opposed an application to register the same word as a trade mark in Turkey. This opposition was based on EIS's earlier Community trade mark registrations and on its registered company name and prior use in Turkey. 

The Turkish Patent Institute (TPI) evaluated EIS's evidence of prior use of the EUROVENTILATORI trade mark in Turkey, as well as use of the company name Euroventilatori International S.p.A. and its CTM registrations. Having done so, it dismissed the opposed application under Articles 8 and 35 of Decree Law No. 556. 

The TPI stated in its decision that it determined that the word “Euroventilatori” was the main element of EIS's trade name and that it was registered by EIS in Classes 7, 11 and 35 as a Community trade mark. The TPI also considered the documents submitted along with the opposition petition and decided that they showed that EIS's products had been sold by several Turkish companies since 2006. Finally, the TPI acknowledged that EIS's claim of genuine ownership of its right was justified and that the goods covered by the application were related or of the same kind as the goods in EIS's field of business. 

Another important point considered by TPI was the obligation of the applicant to act as a prudent merchant who conducts business in the same field as the opponent. According to the TPI, it could not be concluded that EIS's trade mark was not known by the applicant, On that basis it held that the application was filed in bad faith. Therefore, on this and other grounds, the application would also be rejected in accordance with Article 35 of the Decree Law. 

This decision indicates that the TPI has begun to conduct a detailed examination in the same manner as the IP Courts. The TPI's new approach will certainly decrease the workload of the IP Courts. 

Class 46 thanks Selin Sinem Yalıncaklı (Senior Associate, Mehmet Gün and Partners) for supplying this information.
Posted by: Blog Administrator @ 22.49
Tags: Turkey, opposition proceedings, emtitlement,
Sharing on Social Media? Use the link below...
Perm-A-Link: https://www.marques.org/blogs/class46?XID=BHA2748
Reader Comments: 0
Post a Comment

MARQUES does not guarantee the accuracy of the information in this blog. The views are those of the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect those of MARQUES. Seek professional advice before action on any information included here.

The Class 46 Archive








+44 (0)116 2747355
+44 (0)116 2747365

9 Cartwright Court, Cartwright Way
Bardon, Leicestershire
LE67 1UE


Ingrid de Groot
Internal Relations Officer
Alessandra Romeo
External Relations Officer
James Nurton
Newsletter Editor
Robert Harrison

Signup for our blogs.
Headlines delivered to your inbox