Turkiye appeals EUIPO decision annulling ‘TurkAegean’ trademark

Turkiye has filed an appeal against the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) decision that annulled the “TurkAegean” trademark.

The appeal was submitted just days before the deadline, which officially expires on Monday.

This move was widely expected, as Turkiye appears determined to continue its legal battle following the landmark ruling on January 10, which invalidated the trademark initially registered by Turkiye’s Tourism Promotion and Development Agency (TGA) on December 16, 2021.

The key point of interest now is Turkiye’s justification for the appeal, which TGA must submit within the next two months, by May 10. Legal experts familiar with the case told Kathimerini that the EUIPO based its decision on only two of the five arguments presented by Greece, leaving three additional concerns unaddressed. These included broader geopolitical issues. Experts believe the initial ruling is well-founded, making it unlikely that Turkiye will succeed in overturning the decision.

The “TurkAegean” trademark covered six categories: advertising, media, transportation services, education, hospitality, and legal services. However, the EUIPO decision (C58927) cited several reasons for its annulment, most notably that the trademark contained strong geographical connotations, which conflicted with EU trademark laws. According to the ruling, “TurkAegean” would be understood by English-speaking EU consumers as referring to the “Turkish part of the Aegean,” which was deemed misleading.

Additionally, the EUIPO determined that the term lacked originality or any distinctive characteristics. It also dismissed the accompanying red heart symbol as a common advertising element used to convey a customer-centric approach, offering no uniqueness.

The EUIPO further rejected Turkiye’s claim that Greece’s challenge constituted an abuse of rights. Instead, it affirmed that Greece had a legitimate interest in contesting the trademark. Also, the ruling did not challenge Greece’s argument that Turkey’s application violated public order, ethical principles, and was filed in bad faith.

The Greek Industrial Property Organization (OBI) was supported in the legal battle by the Venieris & Alexandropoulou and Patrinos & Kilimiris law firms.

Kathimerini