A Paradigm Shift in Industrial Property Law: The Administrative Cancellation Regime

For decades, cancelling a registered trademark in Türkiye meant one thing: litigation. If a mark had not been used for years, or had drifted into becoming a generic term, a rights holder’s only real option was to file suit before the specialised IP courts and wait — often for years — while the register stayed cluttered with dead weight. That has now changed, and the change reshapes how any brand owner operating in the Turkish market should think about its portfolio.

What changed, and when

Under Article 26 of the Industrial Property Law No. 6769, the power to decide trademark cancellation (revocation) requests was transferred from the courts to TÜRKPATENT, the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office. The provision was written into the law back in 2017 but deliberately given a seven-year runway to let the office build the necessary capacity and procedures. It entered into force on 10 January 2024. For the first time, a party can ask the office itself to strike an unused or degenerated mark from the register, without ever setting foot in a courtroom.

This is not a cosmetic reform. It moves an entire category of disputes out of the judicial system and into an administrative process — faster to initiate, cheaper to run, and decided by the same body that granted the registration in the first place.

	Court cancellation (old default)	TÜRKPATENT cancellation (since 10 Jan 2024)
Decision-maker	Specialised IP courts	TÜRKPATENT, the office itself
Typical pace	Often years of litigation	Designed as a quicker, file-based procedure
Cost profile	Full litigation costs	Lower administrative fees and lean filings
Review	Ordinary appeal routes	Appeal to the specialised IP courts remains open

The grounds for cancellation

Administrative cancellation is available on four grounds, and it is worth knowing each of them precisely:

• the mark has not been genuinely used for an uninterrupted period of five years without proper reason;
• the mark has become the common (generic) name for the goods or services it covers;
• use of the mark has become misleading as to the nature, quality or geographical origin of the goods or services; or
• a guarantee or collective mark is used contrary to its technical regulation.

In practice, the first ground — non-use — is by far the most common. Most cancellation actions are brought by a party whose own application is blocked by an earlier mark that the owner is no longer actually using. The other three grounds are narrower but real: a brand can lose protection if it becomes the everyday word for the product (think of famous historical examples where trademarks slid into generic language), or if the way it is used starts to deceive consumers.

What “genuine use” really means

Because non-use dominates, the practical battleground is nearly always the same question: can the owner prove genuine use? Turkish practice looks for real commercial activity in the market, not paperwork generated to survive a challenge. Persuasive evidence typically includes:

• dated invoices showing sales of the branded goods or services in Türkiye;
• product packaging, labels and catalogues displaying the mark as registered;
• advertising and marketing materials, including digital campaigns, with verifiable dates; and
• sales and distribution records tying the mark to the specific goods and services it covers.

The evidence must relate to the exact goods and services in the registration. A mark registered across ten classes but used on only one line of products is vulnerable to partial cancellation for everything else. Token, symbolic or purely internal use will not save a registration.

The register no longer forgives a dormant mark. If you are not using it and cannot prove you are, assume a competitor can now take it away from you at the office level — quickly and cheaply.

One practical detail deserves emphasis: quality of evidence beats quantity. A handful of clearly dated invoices tied to the registered goods, a catalogue showing the mark exactly as registered, and a dated advertising campaign will do more work than a thick folder of undated screenshots. Foreign owners who license their mark to a Turkish distributor should also make sure the licence trail is documented — use by an authorised licensee counts, but only if you can show the authorisation.

---

Why this matters for your strategy

Two practical shifts follow directly from the reform, and both demand action rather than observation.

First, clearing the register is now faster and cheaper. A dormant mark blocking your application no longer requires a multi-year court battle. A well-prepared, well-evidenced cancellation request can resolve the obstacle at the office level in a fraction of the time and cost. For foreign companies entering the Turkish market, this is a genuine unlock: the “squatter” or abandoned registration standing in your way is now far easier to remove.

Second, use evidence has never mattered more for defence. The same tool that helps you clear obstacles can be turned against your own portfolio. Every brand owner holding Turkish registrations should treat a well-organised, continuously updated use file as basic hygiene — the same way you would keep corporate records or tax documentation in order. The moment to assemble proof of use is before a challenge lands, not in the panic afterwards.

A practical checklist for rights holders

• Audit your Turkish portfolio. Identify which registered marks you are actually using, and in which classes.
• Build and maintain a use file for each active mark, refreshed at least annually with dated commercial evidence.
• Flag dormant registrations you are no longer using — decide whether to revive genuine use or let them lapse strategically.
• Watch for blocking marks. If someone else’s unused registration stands between you and a new application, the administrative route is now the first tool to reach for.
• Act quickly on any notice. If a cancellation request targets your mark, treat TÜRKPATENT’s deadline as immovable.

The appeal route remains open

Moving these disputes to TÜRKPATENT does not close the courthouse door. A cancellation decision by the office can be appealed to the specialised IP courts, preserving judicial oversight of the outcome. The reform is best understood as adding a faster, lower-cost first stage — not as removing rights of review. In many cases the administrative decision will be the end of the matter; in contested, high-value disputes, the ability to escalate to a court remains an important safeguard.

For foreign investors, the message is not “the rules got tougher” — it is “the rules got faster.” That cuts both ways, and preparation is what decides which way it cuts for you.

The bottom line

The message running through Turkish IP practice has never been clearer: use it, document it, or risk losing it. If you hold Turkish marks you are not actively using, or you are blocked by someone who isn’t using theirs, the administrative cancellation route is now the first — and often the fastest — tool to reach for. Rights holders who keep disciplined use records will find the new regime a powerful ally; those who assume registration alone is enough may find it a costly surprise.