Discovery of evidence and actions for determination of evidence are separately regulated under the Civil Procedural Law. Discovery of evidence is a preliminary step taken before any action on the merits, and it only serves to discover and record the evidence that may be relevant to an ongoing or future action on the merits.
It must be emphasised that unlike the US and UK systems, there is no full and frank disclosure procedure under Turkish civil law. In other words, the…
»
Since Turkey’s inclusion as a member of the EPC, a hot topic has been the enforcement or invalidity of Turkish validation of European Patent(s) (“EP”) while proceedings before the European Patent Office (the “EPO”) are pending.
Once an EP is validated in Turkey, it becomes a national patent three months after its first granted decision by the Examination Board of the EPO. For EPs, the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office (the “TPMO”) acts only as a procedural agency. Thus, the…
»
In 2018, the Istanbul IP Court decided on a generic pharmaceutical company’s damages claim based on an unjust PI, in what appears to be the first decision of its kind by the Turkish IP Courts within the pharmaceutical sector. The dispute between an originator firm and a generic firm derived from an infringement claim. The Court had issued a PI, which was lifted after 13 months based on the findings of an expert’s report, which found that no infringement had been made. The…
»
FICPI-Turkey arranged the seventh of its traditional roundtable meetings in September, this time focusing on the trade mark similarity concept for the assessment of likelihood of confusion and the approach of the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office, Türk Patent, and the Courts.
Ms. Gökçe İzgi, a member of the Board of Directors of FICPI-Turkey, moderated the meeting accompanied by Mr. Türkay Alıca, who is a Retired Judge of Civil Courts for Intellectual and Industrial…
»
As per Article 154 of the Turkish IP Law any person who has a legal interest can file an action to have the Court determine that his acts do not constitute an infringement of the intellectual property rights of a rights owner.
For a quite long time patent owners were squeezed between conflicting approaches in the implementation of, on the one hand, the legal interest condition in determination of non-infringement actions (DNI), and, on the other hand, the Bolar exemption in…
»
Amendments to the Turkish Property Code were published in the Official Gazette on 8 July 2019
Notarised signature declarations/notarised signature circulars are no longer required for a number of procedures
It is hoped that this will eliminate paperwork and speed up processes at the Patent and Trademark Office
The Turkish Regulation on the Implementation of the Industrial Property Code, which is the main regulation for industrial property rights, has been amended by a…
»
Co-published
Regulatory data protection (RDP) terms are dealt with only in the Licensing Regulation of the Ministry of Health (MoH). In principle the provision grants the protection of data for six years following the first marketing authorisation for a drug granted in the European Union. However, there is no mechanism to prevent a generic drug company from using the data before the term expires. The MoH interprets the provisions as granting market exclusivity and allows…
»
In Turkey, the prosecution of criminal offenses in trademark law depends on a proper complaint filed by the trademark owner. Once the complaint and the evidence is submitted to the local prosecutor’s office, the file is brought before the local Criminal Court. The Criminal Courts, however, become more and more reluctant to issue the decisions recently. Hence, it is now more important than ever for the trademark owners to be well-prepared before filing the complaint, in terms…
»
Q: What options are open to a patent owner seeking to enforce its rights in your jurisdiction?
Article 149 of the Industrial Property Code 6769 (IP Code) sets the legal framework for claims that can be asserted by the rights holder and the scope of the injunctions that can be granted by the court.
Accordingly, a person can request the court to:
determine whether the third party infringes the patent;
decide on the prevention of the infringement;
decide to stop the action that…
»
When the Industrial Property Law came into force on 10 January 2017, the introduction of the post grant opposition procedure for national patent applications or the new “satisfying national market’s need” criteria concerning compulsory license due to non-use of the patent appeared to be of the most significance. However, as usual, the devil was hidden in the detail. When we first put the new law into practice, we experienced that other provisions such as the use requirement…
»
A discussion whether the freedom of expression is violated by prohibiting the access to a website where a trademark of a third company is used in the domain name was heard before the Turkish Constitutional Court (“the Court”) upon an individual application. In order to understand the ruling of the Court, it is worth looking at the history of the dispute.
Using a trademark of a reputable cargo company “yurtiçikargo” in a domain name as “yurticikargomagdurları.com”, having the…
»
Constitutional Court has annulled Article 398 of Code of Civil Procedure, which established imprisonment for breaching preliminary injunction This court ordered that this come into effect within nine months It is hoped that proposals for new punishment for acting against preliminary injunction will come before Parliament within this period
Upon the application of the Istanbul First IP Court, the Constitutional Court has cancelled Article 398 of Code of Civil Procedure, which…
»
