337 / 522
Any person who has suffered, the State Prosecutor or related offi-
cial authorities may initiate an action of invalidity. The defendant of
this case shall be the proprietor of the wrongfully registered trademark
with the trademark registry. Although an exact foreclosure period in
which to initiate such an action has not been regulated under the
Decree-Law, pursuant to the established case law
3
, 5 years is foreseen
as the foreclosure period. In the event that bad faith actions have
occurred, time limits shall not apply. The competent court is the CCI-
IPR of the domicile of the defendant.
The competent courts for the action of nullity and action of inva-
lidity that completes the process of action of nullity differ. Since this
situation is contrary to the principle of appropriate procedure, the
Court of Cassation allows these actions to be initiated with the Ankara
CCIIPR at the same time.
A final decision of the declaration of invalidity has retroactive
effect. Therefore, with the decision, the trademark shall be deemed
removed from the date of the registration. However, in the event that
the wrongful right holder has acted in good faith, the retroactive effects
of invalidity shall not be extend to any final decision reached concern-
ing the infringement of the trademark enforced, and contracts con-
cluded and executed prior to the decision of invalidity.
The claimant shall enforce the invalidity decision with the TPI
after it becomes absolute. In the event of a registration that has been
made in bad faith, the court may rule for the defendant to compensate
within the scope of this action.
Action of Repeal
These actions are regulated under Article 14 of the Decree-Law. If,
within a period of five years, following the registration, a trademark
has not been put to use without a justifiable reason, or if the use has
been suspended during an uninterrupted period of five years, the trade-
mark shall be repealed. These cases aim to prevent the formation of
protective trademarks and cautionary trademark garbage. The final
decision has no retroactive effect. In the event the non-usage depends
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW
321
3
Decisions of the 11
th
Chamber of the Court of Cassation, dated T. 11.9.2000, 2000/5607 E.,
2000/6604 K. may be given as an example in the relevant matter.