Greece: Tricky issues on dual jurisdiction

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

Greece: Tricky issues on dual jurisdiction

According to the Greek Law on Trade Marks, civil courts have jurisdiction to rule in trade mark infringement cases, whereas administrative courts have jurisdiction on a trade mark's registrability.

A leading company in the field of consumer goods is the owner of various trade marks in Greece consisting of the term "ΧΛΩΡΙΝΗ" and/or its English transliteration "Klorin" for goods in class 3, namely cleansers for household purposes. This mark has a long history of extensive use in the Greek market since the early 1960s by either its current owner or its predecessors.

In fact, it has become so known and established that the relevant public has been using it in order to define a cleanser consisting of a sodium hypochlorite solution. What's next? Another leading company in the same field of business filed a trade mark consisting of that term along with a mark, which is also a well-known trade mark in the competitor's name among the Greek public.

The first company commenced trade mark infringement proceedings before the civil courts and the second commenced invalidity proceedings before the Trademarks Administrative Commission, which by law follow the route of the administrative court's jurisdiction on appeal. In both instances the underlying question is whether Klorin is a well-known trade mark or a trade mark that has become of common use. The Supreme Court, which is the highest level judicial authority in civil proceedings has definitively ruled that the TM owner's competitor has not infringed the TM, since it has been used to define the kind of the product concerned. Alas, the Administrative Court is not of the same view: so far, that is to say before the Administrative Court of Appeal, it was held that Klorin is a well-known mark. As a matter of procedure, the losing party has the right to file a revocation petition before the Council of State, which is the highest level judicial authority in administrative proceedings.

What will happen if the Council of State affirms the trade mark's well-known status, which is contrary to the ruling of the Supreme Court? It seems that in addition to business competition, judicial competition has a role to play in this case.

Manolis Metaxakis


Patrinos & Kilimiris7, Hatziyianni Mexi Str.GR-11528 AthensGreeceTel: +30210 7222906, 7222050Fax: +30210 7222889info@patrinoskilimiris.comwww.patrinoskilimiris.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
The IP boutique is betting that growing investment in quantum and semiconductors will fuel demand as technology shifts toward physical systems
Lawyers say the overhaul better reflects commercial reality, with changes spanning novelty searches, digital designs and access to a small claims track, but stopping short of criminalising unregistered design infringement
Carpmaels & Ransford hires its fourth partner of the year and wins access to UPC files, as fresh orders address costs, confidentiality and the use of divisional patents
Peter Ling of Lenz & Staehelin in Zurich discusses trends in patent litigation, the regulation of AI and the benefits of teaching IP
Brandsmiths and Powell Gilbert will contest claims over several UK trademarks in a High Court case examining the ownership and revival of a heritage brand
Hogan Lovells Cadwalader is taking a fresh strategic approach to pricing in its AI strategy. It could amplify calls for law firms to ditch the billable hour
Charles Harding plans to build a new team around life sciences oppositions and contentious work, drawing on his three decades developing a practice from scratch at D Young & Co
The firm reveals how its litigation strategies informed the arguments that took Masimo’s judgment past $818 million
The firm was rebuilding its IP practice through a string of patent hires and a Texas expansion, but its dissolution has put the newly built talent back into the market
Gift this article