An opposition to a trademark application published in the Official Trademark Bulletin is filed with the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office (TÜRKPATENT) within two months from the publication date of the bulletin by submitting a reasoned petition of opposition. In this process, the opposing party is obliged to pay the official opposition fee in accordance with the legislation and submit the grounds for opposition to the office with concrete information and documentation. How to oppose an application published in the Official Trademark Bulletin is strictly bound by the statutory periods of limitation and procedural rules governed by the Industrial Property Code No. 6769 (IPC). The opposition mechanism provides administrative-level protection for right holders who consider that a sign subject to a registration application is confusingly similar to their own trademark or violates mandatory statutory provisions.

What is the Official Trademark Bulletin, and why is monitoring mandatory?

The Official Trademark Bulletin is an official publication wherein trademarks whose applications have been accepted and have passed formal examination by TÜRKPATENT are disclosed to the public. Published electronically by the Office twice a month, this bulletin enables third parties to become aware of similar or bad-faith applications.

When bulletin monitoring is neglected, bad-faith applications that are identical to an existing trademark or likely to cause confusion among consumers can easily proceed to the registration stage. Since invalidation of a trademark post-registration is only possible through judicial proceedings, opposing during the bulletin publication stage is a far more cost-effective and expeditious remedy.

What are the grounds for opposition to an application published in the Official Trademark Bulletin?

Oppositions against an application published in the Official Trademark Bulletin are lodged based on the absolute grounds for refusal and relative grounds for refusal set forth under the IPC. The opponent may assert that the published trademark is contrary to public order, lacks distinctive character, or infringes upon its own registered rights.

The most frequently invoked grounds during the opposition stage are as follows:

  • Likelihood of confusion: Pursuant to Art. 6/1 of the IPC, an opposition may be filed against applications that are identical or similar to a registered or earlier-dated trademark and create a likelihood of association in the public mind regarding the covered goods or services.
  • Bad faith: Where the applicant has acted in breach of commercial honesty, intended to take unfair advantage of another party’s commercial reputation, or aimed to prevent legitimate registration, an opposition may be lodged pursuant to Art. 6/9 of the IPC.
  • Unauthorized application by commercial agent or representative: Pursuant to Art. 6/2 of the IPC, a right of opposition exists against registration applications filed in the name of a commercial agent or representative without the authorization of the trademark owner.
  • Well-known trademark rights: The provisions of Art. 6/4 and Art. 6/5 of the IPC are enforced against unauthorized registration attempts targeting trademarks that have attained well-known status in Turkey or internationally.

What is the deadline to oppose an application published in the trademark bulletin?

The deadline to oppose an application published in the trademark bulletin is strictly two months from the date of publication of the relevant bulletin. This time limit is explicitly governed under Art. 18 of the IPC and constitutes a statutory period of limitation (forfeiture); if missed, the right of opposition before TÜRKPATENT is entirely extinguished.

The opposition period begins to run on the date the bulletin is announced, and if it coincides with an official holiday, it extends to the first subsequent business day pursuant to statutory procedural rules. To prevent loss of rights, drafting the opposition petition and submitting it to the system without waiting for the final day is of critical importance.

How is an official trademark opposition filed, and how does the process work?

An official trademark opposition is executed by filling out the opposition form, substantiating the grounds, and paying the official fee via TÜRKPATENT’s Electronic Application System (EPATS). As a rule, oppositions filed physically by hand or by post are deemed invalid.

The opposition proceedings are conducted through specific stages:

  1. Preparation of the petition and payment of the fee: Grounds for opposition are substantiated in the petition alongside legal and factual bases. Payment of the opposition fee stipulated in the current TÜRKPATENT fee schedule as of the date the opposition form is recorded in the system is mandatory; oppositions without payment are rejected without substantive examination.
  2. Formal examination: TÜRKPATENT examines whether the opposition was filed within the statutory two-month period, whether the fee was paid in full, and whether it complies with procedural rules. Procedurally defective filings are rejected directly on procedural grounds without proceeding to the merits.
  3. Submission of counter-statements: An opposition that passes formal examination is served upon the applicant for reply. The applicant is granted a one-month period from the date of notification to submit its defenses and evidence against the opposition.
  4. Request for proof of use: If the opposing party’s trademark has been registered for more than five years, the applicant may request that the opponent prove genuine use of its trademark in connection with the goods or services underlying the opposition pursuant to Art. 19/2 of the IPC. If the opponent fails to prove use, the opposition is dismissed.
  5. Substantive examination and decision: The Office examines the petitions of the parties, the evidence submitted, and the classes of goods/services subject to registration, and may accept the opposition in whole, accept it in part, or reject it.

A concrete dispute scenario: Likelihood of confusion and bad faith

A local operator providing boutique hotel and lodging services in Antalya discovers that a nearly identical copy of its trade name and trademark, which it has used under registration for ten years, has been filed by a third party in the Official Trademark Bulletin under the same class. The applicant intends to operate under a similar name in the same geographic region and capitalize on the existing business’s clientele.

The right holder operator creates an opposition filing via the TÜRKPATENT EPATS system prior to the expiry of the two-month period running from the bulletin’s publication date. In the opposition petition, the phonetic and conceptual similarity of the marks, the identical consumer target group, and the degree of recognition in the Antalya region are substantiated with photographs, invoices, and promotional catalogues.

Upon substantive examination, the Office determines that a direct likelihood of confusion exists among the public between the contested sign and the opponent’s trademark. Consequently, pursuant to Art. 6/1 of the IPC, the third party’s trademark application is rejected in its entirety at the bulletin stage, and registration is barred.

What are the most common mistakes in trademark oppositions?

The most common mistake in trademark oppositions is missing the two-month statutory period prescribed by law and failing to pay the opposition fee in a timely manner. The absence of these two elements leads to direct summary rejection on procedural grounds without any examination on the merits.

Other significant errors encountered in practice are:

  • Unsubstantiated and unevidenced filings: Claiming mere similarity without submitting evidence proving consumer perception, sectoral usage patterns, or market conditions increases the likelihood of refusal.
  • Discrepancy in classes and specifications: Failing to properly establish the link between the classes of goods or services of the opposed mark and those of the opponent’s mark leads to an adverse examination outcome.
  • Unpreparedness for proof of use: For trademarks registered for more than five years, failing to timely submit evidence of use (invoices, packaging, advertising expenditures) that may be requested by the opposing party results in the dismissal of the opposition.
  • Unauthorized representation: For oppositions filed on behalf of a company, the defective upload of authorization documents to the system or non-compliance with power of attorney rules constitutes procedural grounds for rejection.

If the opposition is rejected by the TÜRKPATENT Trademarks Department, an appeal may be lodged before the Re-examination and Evaluation Board (YİDK) within two months from the date of notification of the decision. The YİDK is the final administrative appellate body of the Office and conducts the final evaluation of the file.

If the opposition is definitively rejected by the YİDK as well, administrative remedies are exhausted. The right holder is entitled to initiate an action for annulment of the Office decision before the Ankara Civil Courts for Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights within two months from the notification of the YİDK decision. The period for filing an action is subject to a statutory period of limitation (forfeiture); if no action is brought within this period, the trademark registration becomes final.

In intellectual property disputes, diligent bulletin monitoring, rigorous adherence to statutory periods of limitation, and the technical substantiation of opposition petitions are essential prerequisites to barring improper registrations. Trademark attorneys and practitioners working in industrial property, such as Att. Med. Billur Güler Aslım, state that conducting the process on the correct legal footing from the outset prevents potential losses of commercial reputation and market share. Observing administrative and judicial recourse deadlines at every stage of the registration process ensures that enterprises secure their trademark values over the long term.

Related topics