Greece: Risks arising from late trademark renewal under the new law

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Greece: Risks arising from late trademark renewal under the new law

Sponsored by

patrinos-logo.png
Planning, risk and strategy in business

The newly-born Greek law on trademarks implementing Directive (EU) 2015/2436 has an attention-worthy provision, relating to the renewal of trademarks within their grace period. More specifically, the new Greek law on trademarks provides that the payment of the renewal fee can be made within the last six months of the protection’s term. It can also be made within an additional term of six months following the expiry of the formal protection’s term, subject to the payment of the renewal fee increased by 50% and without negating third parties’ rights acquired in the meantime.

What does a “right” mean in this regard?

If one is to assume that said legal provision refers to a subsequent trademark registration obtained by a third party within the earlier trademark’s grace period and before the earlier trademark’s late renewal, it is then clear that we have to deal with an intervening right, in addition to the ones already provided for in the Directive (EU) 2015/2436.

Furthermore, if one is to assume that the legal provision also refers to what is known under Greek law as “a right conferring prospective entitlement", it has to then be accepted that if a third party files a trademark application within the earlier trademark’s grace period, before said trademark is renewed (late), said subsequent trademark application may not successfully be opposed at a later stage.

Such an interpretation seems to penalise late renewal of a trademark by allowing the registration of a confusingly similar or identical trademark filed before the original trademark was renewed in the grace period, without the possibility of opposing such new application.

The above-mentioned parameters raise serious issues regarding the compatibility of the specific provision of the Greek law, not only with the Directive (EU) 2015/2436 but also with the Paris Convention that has been an integral part of the Greek regime on trademarks since 1975.

It is therefore interesting to see how the Greek Trademark Office and the Greek courts will interpret the specific legal provision.

Georgios Panagopoulos

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Attorneys explain why there are early signs that the US Supreme Court could rule in favour of ISP Cox in a copyright dispute
A swathe of UPC-related hires suggests firms are taking the forum seriously, as questions over the transitional stage begin
A win for Nintendo in China and King & Spalding hiring a prominent patent litigator were also among the top talking points
Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard, who live-reported on the seminal dispute, unpicks the trials and tribulations of the case and considers its impact
Attorneys predict how Lululemon’s trade dress and design patent suit against Costco could play out
Lawyers at Linklaters analyse some of the key UPC trends so far, and look ahead to life beyond the transition period
David Rodrigues, who previously worked at an IP boutique, said he may become more involved in transactional work at his new firm
Indian smartphone maker Lava must pay $2.3 million as a security deposit for past sales, as its dispute with Dolby over audio coding SEPs plays out
Powell Gilbert’s opening in Düsseldorf, complete with a new partner hire, continues this summer’s trend of UPC-related lateral movement
IP leaders at Brandsmiths and Bird & Bird, who were on opposing sides at the UK Supreme Court in Iconix v Dream Pairs, unpick the landmark case and its ramifications
Gift this article