KÜHEYLAN HUKUK
Objection to Trademark Application: Objection to Publication, Objection to Rejection Decision and YİDK Process. Within the scope of SMK Art. 17-21 and Law No. 5000, Art. 15/C, grounds of objection, proof of use, allegation of bad faith and legal action against the decisions of the Reexamination and Evaluation Board. This guide is based on the Industrial Property Law No. 6769, the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works No. 5846 and the Supreme Court case law. Updated as of 2026.
An application published in the Official Trademark Bulletin is open to opposition for two months, and after this period has passed, the way to stop a similar trademark is often a costly invalidation suit. For the objecting party, submitting the justification and fee within the period, and for the applicant, submitting the request for proof of use at the Institution stage directly determines the outcome. In this guide, the methods of objection, the grounds of objection in Article 6 of the Industrial Property Law, the decision of the General Assembly of Law dated 2026 regarding bad faith applications, the Re-examination and Evaluation Board (YİDK) stage and the legal action against the Board's decisions subject to a two-month limitation period are explained.
1. What Remedies Are There Against Trademark Applications?
The Industrial Property Law (IPK) provides three different remedies against a trademark application, and the scope of each is different. Making this distinction correctly from the beginning determines which justification can be put forward at which stage.
Third party opinion (Art. 17): From the publication of the application to the registration, anyone can submit a written opinion stating that the trademark should not be registered within the scope of absolute rejection reasons. The opinion holder is not a party to the transactions and cannot rely on previous brand similarity (Art. 5/1-ç).
Objection to publication (Art. 18): Relevant persons may object based on both absolute (Art. 5) and relative (Art. 6) rejection grounds within two months from the publication of the application. This is the most effective way in practice.
Objection to the decision (Art. 20): The party harmed by the decision of the Institution shall object within two months from the notification of the decision. Both the applicant whose application has been rejected and the previous right holder whose objection has been rejected can apply for this method.
The objection is made to the Institution in writing and with reasons. The law requires three elements to be completed within the same two-month period: the appeal petition, the grounds for appeal, and information that the appeal fee has been paid. If the justifications are not submitted within the period, the objection is deemed not to have been made (SMK article 18/2). According to the 2026 tariff, the publication objection fee is 1,150 TL.
The two-month period starts from the publication date of the newsletter and the person is not notified separately. Therefore, for businesses whose brands have commercial value, regular monitoring of the newsletter is a prerequisite for actually exercising the right to object. When the deadline is missed, the application is registered and the same result can only be achieved by filing an invalidity lawsuit in court (Art. 25).
In the assessment of likelihood of confusion, brands are compared as a whole, in their visual, auditory and conceptual aspects. The distinctive power of the common element and the attention level of the target consumer are also taken into account. The commonality of a descriptive or commonly used word in the industry alone does not result in confusion.
Possibility of confusion SMK article 6/1 Previously dated trademark; identity or similarity of signs and goods or services
Application for commercial attorney or representative SMK article 6/2 Representation relationship between the parties and unauthorized application
Unregistered previous use SMK article 6/3 Use in the course of trade before the application date and the rights acquired by this use
well-known brand SMK m. 6/4-5 Level of recognition in Türkiye; unfair advantage, damage to reputation or damage to distinctiveness
Name, trade name, photograph, copyright SMK article 6/6 The appellant's ownership of these rights
Malice SMK article 6/9 Facts showing that the applicant knew someone else's sign and applied for a purpose contrary to the rule of honesty
In its decision dated 2026, the General Assembly of the Supreme Court of Appeals defined a bad faith application as an application made by a person who knows that he is not entitled to the right, contrary to the rule of honesty. Board; He listed within this scope the deliberate registration of an unregistered sign used by someone else, applications made to prevent a competitor, registrations made for trademark trade or blackmail purposes that are not used, and stated that bad faith constitutes an exception to the principle of territoriality, which means the protection of the trademark only in the country where it is registered (YHGK, 11.03.2026, E.2025/280, K.2026/144). Thus, it is clear that a trademark used abroad but not registered in Türkiye can be protected against the person who knowingly registers it in Türkiye. In another file approved by the 11th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, it was accepted that bad faith affected the entire application and had consequences for all classes (11th HD, 18.03.2025, E.2024/3844, K.2025/1879).
The institution notifies the applicant of the objection and asks for his opinions (SMK article 19/1). One of the applicant's most effective defense tools is the request for proof of use. If the trademark underlying the objection has been registered in Türkiye for at least five years on the date of the contested application, the applicant may ask the objector to prove that he has seriously used the trademark in Türkiye within the last five years. If not proven, the objection is rejected; If the trademark is used only in some goods and services, the examination is limited to those goods and services (Art. 19/2).
The timing of this request is decisive. In a decision approved by the 11th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, it was accepted that the defense of non-use, which was not put forward at the Institution stage, cannot be put forward for the first time in the case of annulment of the YİDK decision (11th HD, 26.03.2025, E. 2024/4141, K.2025/2131). In other words, if this defense is not included in the first response to the Institution, it may not be compensated at the judicial stage. If the institution deems it necessary, it may encourage the parties to reach a compromise; In this process, mediation provisions apply (Art. 19/4). In practice, the dispute can be terminated by narrowing the list of goods and services, contracts regarding the coexistence of trademarks, or a notarized letter of consent. The letter of consent paves the way for the application in absolute rejection decisions given due to similarity or indistinguishable similarity with the previous trademark (Art. 5/3).
An objection shall be made against the decision of the Institution regarding the objection within two months from the notification of the decision. Justifications and fee must be submitted within this period. The law clearly states that the justifications cannot be changed or new justifications cannot be added after the objection period has passed (SMK article 20/2). These objections are reviewed by the Reexamination and Evaluation Board; The Board receives the opinions of the parties and encourages compromise if necessary. The decision of the Board is the final decision of the Institution (Art. 21).
A lawsuit may be filed against the Board's decisions at the Ankara Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights Civil Court within two months from the notification date of the decision (Law No. 5000 Art. 15/C; SMK Art. 156/2). The lawsuit is filed against the other party together with the Institution. If the application has been registered in the meantime, the invalidity of the trademark is requested along with the cancellation of the YİDK decision. Decisions made in these cases cannot be enforced unless they become final (SMK article 162).
The two-month period is derogatory and is automatically observed by the court. The Supreme Court approved the decision regarding the procedural rejection of the case filed one day after the last day of the two-month period from the notification of the Board's decision to the attorney (11. HD, 19.09.2024, E.2023/4679, K.2024/6563). Considering that the institution's notifications are deemed to have been made at the end of the tenth day following their placement in the e-mail box (SMK article 160/6), the correct determination of the beginning of the period determines the fate of the case.
Third person opinion (Art.17) until registration Publication of the application in the bulletin
Objection to publication (Art. 18) 2 months Publication of the application in the bulletin
Lawsuit against YİDK decision (5000 article 15/C) 2 months (derogatory) Notification of board decision
Invalidity case after registration (Art.25) Silence period 5 years; This limit does not apply in case of bad faith Knowing or needing to know that the next brand is used
A company producing home textiles in Bursa has been selling under the "Lavora" brand since 2019, but has not registered the brand. The company's former regional distributor, whose contract it terminated two years ago, filed the application for the phrase "Lavora Home" in classes 24 and 35. The company became aware of the application seven weeks after the publication of the bulletin.
Since the two-month period from publication has not yet expired, the possibility of objection is open. The objection must be based on unregistered previous use (SMK article 6/3) and bad faith (article 6/9). Previous use of invoices, catalogs and fair records issued since 2019; The distributorship agreement and correspondence show that the applicant knows the brand. In terms of the criteria in the 2026 decision of the General Assembly of Law, the registration of a sign known due to a commercial relationship after the relationship ends is a typical appearance of bad faith. The company must also apply on its own behalf on the same day and submit the grounds for objection and the fee before the deadline. If the deadline had been missed, the same result would have been sought through an invalidation lawsuit filed after registration and a much longer trial.
What happens if I miss the two-month appeal period?
The application is registered. For absolute rejection reasons, a third party opinion may be submitted until registration; However, for disputes based on previous trademark similarity, the remedy is an invalidity lawsuit to be filed after registration (SMK article 25).
My trademark registered abroad was registered by someone else in Türkiye. What can I do?
As a rule, trademark protection is national. However, if the applicant registered the trademark knowingly and contrary to the rule of good faith, a bad faith objection or an invalidity suit is possible. If the applicant is a former representative or distributor, SMK art. It comes to the agenda at 6/2.
Can the parties reach an agreement after the objection?
Yes. The institution may encourage the parties to compromise. Narrowing the list of goods and services, co-existence agreement or notarized consent are frequently used solutions in practice.
In which court can a lawsuit be filed against the YİDK decision?
The competent and competent court for all of Türkiye is the Ankara Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights Civil Court. Appeals and appeals against the decision are open; The decision cannot be implemented until it is finalized.
What documents are presented for proof of use?
Dated invoices, packaging and product photographs, catalogs and advertising materials, internet sales records and fair participation documents are used. The documents must show the brand itself, the relevant goods and services and the last five-year period.
Postponing the justification or fee: If the justification or fee information is not submitted within a two-month period, the objection is deemed not to have been made.
Thinking that you can add new grounds in your objection to the decision: The grounds cannot be changed after the deadline; The first petition must be constructed completely.
Not putting forward the request for proof of use at the Institution stage: This defense may not be put forward for the first time in the case of annulment of the YİDK decision.
Miscalculating the duration of the case: If the date on which the electronic notification is deemed to have been made is not taken into account, even a one-day delay will lead to the rejection of the case.
Leaving the claim of bad faith without evidence: The application of a similar trademark alone does not indicate bad faith; The relationship of the parties and the applicant's information must be demonstrated with concrete documents.
The trademark opposition process is a process that operates in short and precise periods and where the justification established in the first petition determines all subsequent stages. For the objector, the complete submission of justifications and evidence within two months, and for the applicant, the timely evaluation of proof of use and reconciliation opportunities directly affects the outcome.
Küheylan Law Firm handles trademark disputes with a focus on time management and evidence strategy, from bulletin follow-up and preparation of objection petitions to proof of use and proof of bad faith, from the YIDK stage to cancellation and invalidity cases in the Ankara Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights Civil Court.
Important Legal Notice: This guide has been prepared by Küheylan Law Firm for general information purposes and does not constitute a legal opinion. Since legislation and judicial precedents may vary, a file-specific legal evaluation must be made before deciding on concrete disputes. Person names and numbers in the case studies are representative.
KÜHEYLAN HUKUK