Turkish Courts Invalidate Trademark for Similarity to Madran Mountain Spring Water

In Turkey, absolute grounds for refusal in trademark registration are regulated under Article 5 of the Industrial Property Code No 6769 (the IP Code). According to Article 5(1)(f) of the IP Code, signs that may mislead the public about matters such as the nature, quality or geographical origin of the goods or services are one of the absolute grounds for refusal, meaning that those signs shall not be registered as trademarks.

Background

In an opposition proceeding before the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office (TÜRKPATENT), the owner of PINAR MADRAN SU filed an opposition to the trademark application PÜRSU EGE MADRAN, based on both absolute and relative refusal grounds under Articles 5 and 6 of the IP Code. The opposition was rejected by TÜRKPATENT.

Following the rejection of the opponent’s appeal by TÜRKPATENT, the opponent initiated a cancellation action against the decision of TÜRKPATENT and requested the cancellation of the decision and the invalidation of the applicant’s trademark registration.

Decision

As a result of the initial proceedings, the first instance court partially accepted the case and, in its decision, cancelled TÜRKPATENT’s decision and invalidated the applicant’s trademark registration in relation to ‘beers; preparations used in beer making. Mineral waters, spring waters, table waters, sodas. Vegetable and fruit juices, their concentrates and extracts, soft drinks. Energy drinks (non-alcoholic); protein-enriched sports drinks’ in Class 32, as well as retailing services in Class 35 allocated to the goods in Class 32. 

In its reasoning, the first instance court concluded that while the opponent’s other arguments were not found to be legitimate, the term ‘MADRAN’, which is the name of a geographical place that is famous for its spring water, may be misleading to the public: Madran is the name of a mountain famous for its natural spring water, and ‘Su’ means water in Turkish. ‘Madran Su’, therefore, refers to spring water coming from Madran Mountain in Aydın. Consequently, the trademark ‘PÜRSU EGE MADRAN’ was found ineligible for registration, in accordance with Article 5(1)(f) of the IP Code. 

Upon both parties’ appeal, the Regional Court of Appeals examined the case and agreed with the assessment of the first instance court. It highlighted that ‘MADRAN SU’ is the name of the natural spring water coming from Madran Mountain, and that there was no claim nor evidence in the case file showing that the applicant had previously engaged in the production or marketing of such natural spring water coming from the Madran region, or that it has a permit for such an activity. As a result, the trademark ‘PÜRSU EGE MADRAN’ was found to be misleading regarding its geographical origin. 

This decision was upheld by the Court of Cassation in its Decision No 2024/5695 E (merits) 2025/3450 K (decision), dated 20 May 2025.

Evaluation

This decision underlines the importance of protecting consumers from potentially misleading geographical origin in trademark applications, regardless of whether the geographical origin is registered as a geographical indication. 

The courts have emphasised that trademarks that could mislead the public with regard to the geographical origin of the goods must be refused if there is no real connection between the trademark and the relevant geographical origin.

In this regard, in addition to ‘mineral waters, spring waters, table waters [and] sodas’, for which Madran is a famous a geographical origin, the courts rightfully determined that ‘beers; preparations used in beer making . . . Vegetable and fruit juices, their concentrates and extracts, soft drinks. Energy drinks (non-alcoholic); protein-enriched sports drinks’ in Class 32 also contain water as a key ingredient and that this decision should, therefore, also apply to all goods in Class 32.

The courts also extended this reasoning to services in Class 35, which were allocated to the retail of goods in Class 32, as the application may be misleading for these services as well. This serves as a precedent for accepting these goods and services as similar and connected.

Finally, in addition to protecting consumers, this decision is important in protecting businesses that genuinely bottle and market water from the relevant region and in providing fair competition in the market.