Specialized Law Firm Providing Boutique Services in Intellectual Property

Trademark . Patent . Design . Copyright . Unfair Competition

Awards and Memberships

Who We Are

Suluk Intellectual Property Law Firm is a highly prestigious and renowned law firm in Turkey that provides boutique services to a wide range of clients from individuals to multinational corporations exclusively in all areas of IP, especially on trademark, patent, design, copyright, information technology, media and unfair competition law. Our Office services both litigation and prosecution.

We work on groundbreaking cases, directly involving in the latest developments in pharmaceutical, software, electronic, manufacturing, telecommunication, publishing. broadcasting, textile, food and many other industries.

Our firm's mixed team of lawyers and trademark attorneys are based in Istanbul. We also have an established office in Ankara where Turkish Patent and Trademark Office is located.

Our main priority is to give the best service at every level of disputes and to present and offer alternative solutions in identifying ways to achieve successful results.

References

Our Services

Our Team

Ass. Prof. Dr. Cahit SULUK

Attorney at Law
Founder

Ass. Prof. Dr. Cahit Suluk, Attorney at Law, Trademark and Patent Attorney

Dr. Cahit Suluk is the founder of Suluk Intellectual Property Law Firm, a highly-regarded IP strategist and litigator. Dr. Suluk graduated from the Faculty of Law at Istanbul University in 1992. He obtained his PhD in 2000 on design protection. He received the title of Associate Professor in 2020 with his thesis titled Employee Inventions Law. He has been active as a lawyer at the Istanbul Bar since 2001.

Having a wealth of experience in every area of intellectual property, combined with academic knowledge, Dr Suluk is one of the best-known practitioners in Turkey. He provides legal consultancy to many national and international clients active in different sectors, including media, food, pharmaceutical, clothing, technology, cosmetics and domestic appliance.

Dr Suluk has been creating valuable strategies for his clients and obtaining favourable results in complicated patent cases, especially in pharmaceutical patent law. He is also active in trademark and design law, and has been referred to as a sole expert in Turkey in design law by international ranking authorities.

Regarding copyright cases, Dr Suluk represents leading media organisations in Turkey. He also had a major role in establishing some of the Turkish copyright collecting societies and provides them with regular legal services.

Dr. Suluk is not only a distinguished and reputable IP litigator and strategist, but also a highly respected academician and lecturer. He conducted research on his habilitation at the Max Planck Institute in Munich. He has published 12 books and over 40 articles, and issued nine papers on IP law to date. Dr Suluk served as visiting lecturer at principal universities in Istanbul and is still active as an assistant professor at Sabahattin Zaim University.

Dr Suluk’s IP-related academic research studies and publications are followed by a large audience, including judges, lawyers and academics. His publications are cross-referenced in first-instance and Supreme Court decisions and often used by IP experts. He contributes to the drafting of IP regulations (eg, the new Turkish Industrial Property Act and revised Turkish Copyright Act).

“Cahit Suluk, a “dedicated and experienced lawyer” and a regular fixture on some of the market’s most important litigations. While sources highlight his design litigation know-how above all, he is a versatile operator who is equally at home on patent and trademark cases. With an unimpeachable academic record, he counts among the most substantively knowledgeable figures on the market”. WTR- The World’s Leading Trademark Professionals 2015

“Founding partner Cahit Suluk has a granular understanding of IP law, having authored 12 books and over 40 articles on the subject. He brings a sure touch to alternative dispute resolution efforts, but also defends rights holders valiantly before civil and criminal courts when necessary. His colleague”. WTR – The World’s Leading Trademark Professionals 2018

“Hotshot litigator Cahit Suluk “immerses himself in the nuances and argues his case persuasively, concentrating on merits”; the PhD combines deep experience, peerless academic calibre and admirable technical nous. He can be found at his eponymous firm”. IAM Patent 1000 The World’s Leading Patent Professionals 2017

“Cahit Suluk is “really strong in litigation counselling; he approaches matters with a theoretical academic mindset”. IAM Patent 1000, The World’s Leading Patent Professionals 2016

“Renowned litigator Cahit Suluk handles ground-breaking cases for a number of cutting-edge technology entites”. IAM Patent 1000 The World’s Leading Patent Professionals 2015

Practice Areas: Trademark, Patent, Design, Copyright, IT&Media, Unfair Competition.

Memberships: AIPPI, ALAI, INTA, Istanbul Bar, Turkish Patent and Trademark Office, Istanbul Chamber of Commerce Commission on IP.

Our Publications

Books

Articles

Basics of the New Turkish Industrial Property Law – 2018
Pharmaceutical Patents in Turkey – 2014
Retail Services Chaos in Class 35 – 2013	Download
Is Registertration Certificate A “Safe Harbor” in Terms of Industrial Property Law? – 2013
The Resolution of Dispute between Copyright Societies and Users in the Light of the Draft Copyright Law – 2013	Download
A Comparative Law Perspective of the Protection of Unregistered Industrial Products Under Turkish Unfair Competition Law – 2012	Download
An Assessment on Registration Procedure of Designs in Turkey – 2012	Download
Discussions on the Convenience of Criminal Sanctions for Patent Infringement – 2012	Download
Influence of Invalidation Action against Utility Models on Third Parties – 2012	Download
Compensation of Interest for Author and Owner of the Structure in Case of Architectural Works of Art – 2011	Download
Examination of Absolute Novelty by Witness Experts in Invalidation Actions Regarding Industrial Property – 2011	Download
Partial Invalidation of Designs – 2009	Download
National Treatment in Intellectual Propert Law and Obligation of Giving Guaranty for Foreigners in – 2007	Download
The Influence of Invalidation Decisions on Industrial Property Rights – 2006	Download
Intellectual Property Rights: Practical Problems and Some Recommendations – 2005	Download
Comments on the Decisions of Turkish Constitutional Court on the Utility Models and Trademarks: The Issue of Incompatibility with the Constitution – 2004	Download
“Informed User” in Design Law and Some Problems in Practice – 2003	Download
Invisible Designs in EC and Turkish Law – 2002	Download
The Legal Situation of Designs Which does not Leave any Option to Its Designer – 2002	Download
Protection of Utility Models in EU and Turkish Law (I) – 2002	Download
Protection of Utility Models in EU and Turkish Law (II) – 2002	Download
Cumulative Protection of Designs in EU and Turkish Laws – 2002	Download
The Usage of Designs for Repair Purposes – 2001	Download
Conditions of the Protection of Registered Designs in EU and Turkish Law – 2001	Download

Papers

Applied Art Protection in Turkish Law and Strategies – 2018	Download
Applied Art Protection in Turkish Law and Strategies – 2016	Download
A Comparative Law Perspective of the Protection of Unregistered Industrial Products under Turkish Unfair Competition Law- 2012	Download
Remarks on the Draft Design Law – 2009	Download
International Protection of Designs- 2006	Download
Problems of Publishers on Intellectual Property Law and Proposed Solutions- 2006	Download
Practical Problems on Design and Utility Model Protection – 2005	Download
Striving against Piracy and Printing Sector- 2004	Download
Legal Protection of Packaging and Graphic Designs- 2003	Download
Protection of Spare Part Designs or Straggle of Keeping the Independent Automotive Industry Alive – 2002	Download

Decisions

In General

Trademark

Patent & Utility Model

Design

Unfair Competition

FAQ

Turkey became a party to some conventions and international agreements, such as Paris in 1925 and Bern in 1952. Starting in 1995 Turkey approved the other fundamental agreements, such as WTO / TRIPs, PCT, Madrid Protocol, The Hague, Rome, WCT and WPPT.

Turkey adapts multi-class filing and registration system, enabling new applications to be filed in multiple classes, with a reduced official filing fee being applied to each class after the first initial filing.

In 2001 the specialized IP Civil and Criminal Courts were established in Turkey. Since then the specialized courts have been handling the IP related cases. Currently there are more than 20 IP courts in Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir. In the other cities provincial courts are authorized to handle IP cases. Especially in the recent years both the number and the quality of the court decisions have been increasing and the case law has been developing rapidly with the decisions of both first-degree IP courts and the Supreme Court.

The written proceeding procedure is recognized as the general procedure for the civil and criminal court actions in Turkey. The proceedings in IP cases are carried out according to the general proceeding procedure. The judges, who command the IP courts, come from a law background and the technical issues are solved by the assistance of experts. Before IP court; invalidation of a present registration, cancellation of a given verdict, determination of the infringement occurred, determination of the absence of the infringement, assignment of the right as a result of usurpation, prevention of the infringement, annulment of the consequences of the infringement, compensation for the damages occurred, seizure of the products and instruments that are subjected to infringement, acknowledgement of the property right to the right owner on these products and instruments or their annihilation and announcement of the ruling to the public can be claimed.

In the criminal cases, investigation and prosecution are subjected to a complaint by the right holder in principle. In other words, a public action cannot be filed ex-officio, unless the person, whose rights are violated, files a complaint against the infringers. There are also some exceptional cases, such as bandrol crimes, that are ex-officio investigated and prosecuted by the public prosecutors and the courts.

The right owner may withdraw his/her complaint or renounce his/her action any time before the verdict is finalized. The case drops with the withdrawal of the complaint or the renouncement of the case. In the cases, where there is more than one perpetrator, the case drops totally even when the complaint is withdrawn only for one or several perpetrators. A person, who withdraws his/her complaint or the case, may file a complaint or a case again with respect to the same issue. Therefore, withdrawal of the case depends on the permission of the defendant. However, the plaintiff does not require the permission of the perpetrator to renounce the right of filing a complaint or a case regarding the mentioned violation. Yet the person, who renounces his/her right, is not entitled to file a case or a complaint on the same issue later on. The case will drop in the event of waiver of the right, just like it happens in the abandonment or withdrawal.

In civil suits, the right owner may request the transfer of the property right of the counterfeit products and instruments to him/her. However in the criminal suits, it is not possible to grant the property right of the products and instruments to complainant. In practice, the civil and criminal cases are filed usually simultaneously. The possession of the counterfeit products is generally given either to complainant or to perpetrator in their capacity of trustee. In the proceeding phase, it can be alleged by both parties that the products that are subjected to examination are not the same with the ones that were seized. In order to eliminate this prejudice, to give the possession of the products that are claimed to be counterfeit to the court safety room is the most appropriate solution.

On the other hand, just like in the general procedure, preliminary injunctions can be demanded in criminal and/or civil courts actions based on IPRs.

The burden of proof is generally on the plaintiff. However there are some exceptions of this general rule. For instance, in the invalidation actions based on the non-use of the trademark, the burden of proof is on the defendant. In other words, in the invalidation actions based on non-use ground, it is sufficient for the plaintiff to claim that the trademark has not being used. If the trademark has actually being used, it is expected from the defendant to prove it. Otherwise, it is deemed as the plaintiff proved his/her case and the case would be accepted. Besides these exceptions, the burden of proof is always on the plaintiff.

The duration of a civil or a criminal court action filed before the IP courts is approximately 1 to 3 years in Turkey. There are several reasons under this lengthy period of time. For instance; the courts generally appoint an expert panel for examination of the file and when the report is lacking or not adequate or upon the objections by the parties, it sometimes become compulsory to appoint a second or even a third expert panel for re-examination of the file. Thus, duration of the expert examination(s) on the file takes around 1 to 2 years.

Upon the appeal of the verdict held by the IP court, the duration of the appeal examination before the Supreme Court takes approximately 15 to 18 months. Additionally, re-examination of the decision of the Supreme Court can also be demanded and the re-examination phase usually takes 6 to 8 months. Briefly, the approximate duration of the finalization of an IP court decision including the appeal and the re-examination phases takes 1 to 5 years.

The cost of proceedings and the attorney fees in Turkey are very low compared to European countries. According to the data of WIPO Magazine, February 2010 Edition, for a patent case it is paid approximately 100.000 Euro in Spain, 80.000-150.000 Euro in France, 750.000-1.500.000 Euro in UK as attorney fees, whereas in Turkey approximately 10.000-50.000 Euro is requested as an attorney fee.

The official costs of proceedings are also very low in Turkey. For instance, the official filing fee of an invalidation action is less than 100 Euro. In the further phases of the proceeding, the file is sent to a panel of experts, consist of 3 people. The fee for the expert panel is approximately 750 Euro. In the case, when the file is sent to a new panel of experts, the mentioned amount shall be paid for the new expert examination as well. On the other hand, the official cost of appealing an action is approximately 100 Euro.

As in action for damages, in the cases, in which the matter of dispute is a certain amount of money, a certain percent of that amount, namely % 0.60 is deposited in the treasury of the court as the legal fee.

When there is a risk that the action in dispute might create an important danger or cause an irreparable damage, then the judge has the right to decide for a preliminary injunction against the defendant at the beginning of or during the court action. In this context the owner, whose for instance trademark has been damaged has a right to demand preliminary injunctions, such as the cessation of the acts of infringement of the trademark rights of the plaintiff, the seizure of the infringing goods or ordering the placement of security for damages to be compensated.

A preliminary injunction request can be filed before the filing of the main court action (ex-parte) or within the plaint petition at the time of the filing of the main action or during the trial at the first instance phase. It is allowed to file the request until the end of the first instance proceeding. If there is a preliminary injunction request prior to the filing of the main action, the subsequent court action (main action) must be filed within 10 days after the issuance of the preliminary injunction.

All the evidences that will be submitted during the main court action must be submitted in advance when the request of preliminary injunction is filed. If the preliminary injunction request is ex-parte filed before the main court action, all the evidences that have already been submitted together with the preliminary injunction request must be re-submitted to the main file. This process prevents the advancement of the case and thus the decision and also brings extra costs. Therefore if there is not a very crucial and/or specific situation there is no need to request an ex-parte preliminary injunction prior to the main action and it would be better to file the request within the plaint petition for the main action.

The process may be concluded in 1 to 2 months if the judge decides to continue to the proceeding in the absence of the defendant, without sending any notification to him/her and also decides not to seek an expert report. However if the notification has made to the defendant and both of the parties has been called out to the courts and the judge decides to send the case file to an expert then this period may be lengthen to 10 months. If the action is also considered as a criminal act then it is preferable to file a criminal complaint to the public prosecutor other than requesting a preliminary injunction case when the length of the preliminary injunction proceeding in the civil courts are considered. The preliminary injunction decisions that are held within at least 2 months can be obtained in 2 to 3 days from the public prosecutor.

The judge can rule in favor of preliminary injunction either gratuitously or by obliging the plaintiff to secure a deposit in return. When the deposit is obligatory that the party who got the preliminary injunction decision in favor must secure the amount of deposit in Turkish Liras in cash or lay up the letter of guarantee to the court’s payment office. The letter of guarantee can only be issued by the national banks of deposit. In practice it is not possible for a foreign enterprise that has neither a domicile nor an official branch in Turkey to obtain a letter of guarantee from the Turkish deposit banks. As a result the foreign firms may only secure a deposit in cash.

The deposit will be held in the pay office of the court until the decision of the first instance court is become final and binding. Yet if the case is dismissed in the end of the proceeding and the defendant suffer damages, for example because of the preliminary injunction preventing him from use of the trademark, the defendant is entitled to file an independent court action in order to compensate his/her damages from this deposit. However it has to be mentioned that the rejection of the main case does not necessarily mean that the preliminary injunction decision was unlawful and/or the defendant has been suffering damages because of this decision. The defendant is obliged to prove that he/she had suffered losses precisely because of the unlawful preliminary injunction and to submit solid evidences to show the size of his/her damages.

Since the secured deposit is not being valued in any ways, the amount of money that was secured loses its value as the time passes in the course of proceedings. This is the most essential element that impels the firms to think twice before requesting a preliminary injunction. The amount of the deposit may vary according to the volume of the enterprises of the both parties and/or the context of the commercial activity that will be prevented by preliminary injunction. This amount can be a couple of thousand or of hundred thousand Turkish Liras. In the special cases such as an infringement of a pharmaceutical patent, one million Turkish Liras can be requested as the guarantee. Within this year in one of the cases where our firm is representing the plaintiff, it was held to a preliminary injunction against the biggest Turkish national bank by the IP courts under the obligation of securing an amount of 150.000 Turkish Liras (app. 30.000 Euro) as a deposit. As a result the use of the trademark in consideration has been ceased as a precautionary measure. This amount is one of the highest amounts that have been appraised by the IP courts so far.

In the practice of Turkish Law, the IP courts seek the assistance of experts nearly in every single case related to copyrights, patent, trademark and design law and unfair competition. The Supreme Court obliges the examination of experts even in the matter of similarity among trademarks and depends on the reason that the disputes regarding IP law necessitate special and technical knowledge.

There are three people in the expert panels in general. It is usually assessed 1.500 TL (300 Euro) in total as the fee of three experts, approximately 500 TL for each. However this amount may vary according to concrete case and can be raised to the amount of 4.500 TL (1.000 Euro). As there is a possibility that the case file may be sent to a second or even a third panel of experts according to the situation this cost can be doubled or tripled.

The party who lost the case pays also the expert fees. However it must be mentioned that the plaintiff pays the fees of experts in advance after the court appoints the panel of experts. In the case of plaintiff winning the case the amount of money that plaintiff has paid as the expert fee will be collected from the defendant at the end of the trial.

According to the art.17 of the Hague Convention there may be no security, bond or deposit of any kind imposed by reason of their foreign nationality, or of lack of domicile or residence in the country, upon nationals of one of the contracting states, having their domicile in one of these States, who are plaintiffs or parties intervening before the courts of another of those States. As a result nationals from the contracting states of the Hague Convention shall be exempted from this obligation for the cases filed in Turkey. With the exception of Hague Convention and the bilateral agreements that recognize the principal of reciprocity among the contracting states, it can be easily declared that the ones who file or follow up or intervene in a case in Turkey have the obligation to secure a deposit. This procedural rule is enforceable for all types of cases as well as IP. The deposit that is demanded during the filing is an institution related to the procedural law. Therefore it is not possible to state that the principal of national treatment in TRIPs and/or Paris Convention shall dissolve the obligation to secure a deposit for a foreigner. In other words; the articles regarding national treatment among the contracting states in TRIPs and Paris Convention does not hinder the art.32 of International Private and Civil Procedure Code that obliges the foreigners to secure a deposit; nevertheless art.17 of the Hague Convention does.

Media

News

COVID-19 – Update from Turkey/Continuation of our services

Dear Colleagues,

We hope none of you and your families were effected from the COVID-19 and our thoughts are with the people all over the world who is suffering from this virus.

According to the official statements, the virus has just begun to spread last week in Turkey and we’ve already taken our precautions to prevent any contamination of the virus to our personnel and discontinuation of our business.

Some of our lawyers and staff started to work from home and all technologic measures were taken to operate remotely, when necessary.

We continue to provide our services in diligently and timely.

We wish you and your families good health and send our warm wishes.

Best regards,

Suluk IP Team

Devamı...

TURKISH PATENT OFFICE HAS APPLIED DISCOUNT UP TO 40% ON THE OFFICIAL FEES

Turkish Patent and Trademark Office has applied discount up to 40% on the official fees of trademark, patent, design and utility model’s application, opposition, appeal, renewal, assignment and registration transactions.

Please contact us from info@suluk.com.tr for more information.

Devamı...

Adress	:	Altunizade Mah. Fahrettin Kerim Gökay Cad. Okul Sok. Altunizade Sitesi, 1 A Blok, Daire 12 Üsküdar / İstanbul
Phone	:	+ (90) 216 474 12 07
Fax	:	+ (90) 216 474 12 09
E-mail	:	info@suluk.com.tr
Maps	:	Click to view

Who We Are

References

Referances

Referances

Referances

Referances

Referances

Referances

Referances

Referances

Our Services

Our Team

Attorney at Law Founder

Attorney at Law Trademark Attorney Partner

Attorney at Law

Of Counsel

Ass. Prof. Dr. Cahit SULUK

Attorney at Law Founder

Bahattin CARKACI, MBA

Attorney at Law Trademark Attorney Partner

Faruk SULUK

Attorney at Law

Zeynep BALCIK

Of Counsel

Our Publications

Books

Articles

Papers

Decisions

FAQ

Media

News

Attorney at Law
Founder

Attorney at Law
Trademark Attorney
Partner

Attorney at Law
Founder

Attorney at Law
Trademark Attorney
Partner