This Practice Note deals with the strategic and practical issues to be considered when registering a trade mark. It includes guidance on choosing a trade mark, assessing the appropriate territorial scope, drafting the specification, conducting clearance searches and carrying out a cost-benefit analysis. It also sets out a summary of the practical process. This Practice Note focuses on the issues to consider when registering a UK trade mark but it includes references to both UK and EU case law and legislation, and to EU trade mark registrations (EUTMs), as appropriate. The UK is no longer part of the EUTM regime as Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 was revoked in the UK at 11.00 pm on 31 December 2020 (IP completion day). However, pursuant to the Trade Marks (Amendment etc) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/269 and the Designs and International Trade Marks (Amendment etc) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/638, holders of EUTMs as at IP completion day automatically became holders of comparable national UK trade mark registrations, which are governed by the Trade Marks Act 1994 (TMA 1994). The

Trade mark rights before and after Brexit The purpose of this Practice Note is to summarise, at a glance, the various different trade mark rights available in the UK prior to and following Brexit. Since IP completion day (11.00 pm on 31 December 2020), the UK is no longer part of the EU trade mark (EUTM) regime. This means that the UK is no longer included in the territory covered by an EUTM and is no longer subject to Regulation (EU) 2017/1001, which was revoked on IP completion day pursuant to the Trade Marks (Amendment etc) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/269. As a consequence, the UK set up a system whereby the holder of an EUTM as at IP completion day automatically became the holder of a comparable trade mark in the UK. This also applies to international trade mark registrations which

The purpose of this Precedent trade mark search sheet is to provide an efficient mechanism for a business to set out instructions as to the scope of the clearance searches to be conducted prior to introducing a new or updated brand.

IP analysis: The production of deepfakes, made possible through the technological advancement of generative AI, present a unique legal challenge for impacted individuals and legal practitioners alike. In the absence of any codified image right legislation, and with the government confirming in March 2026 that it would take further time to consider the merits of introducing a new digital replica or personality right, practitioners and high-profile individuals must instead rely upon the existing framework of IP rights and legislation to combat the rise of harmful deepfakes. Historic precedent demonstrates that it is possible for individuals to take action against the misuse of their image and likeness within the UK, and the recent trend of celebrities registering their likeness and renowned features as trade marks evidences the latest rationale in how best to proactively address the problem. While their utility as a tool of deterrence is acknowledged, it remains to be seen how effective trade marks will be in combatting the production and distribution of harmful deepfakes in the courts. Written by Hallam Whitehead, solicitor at Knights.

IP analysis: This News Analysis provides an outline of the key trade mark implications of the first English judgment on generative AI, ending (while an appeal is being considered) a three-year legal battle between Getty Images (Getty Images) and Stability AI (Stability). While much of the attention on the case revolved around the copyright aspects of the claim, the trade mark claims raised novel questions relating to artificially created watermarks containing signs identical or similar to the claimant’s trade marks, and the allocation of liability between the defendant (the developer of a generative AI platform) and its users. Both the copyright and the trade mark rulings are highly fact sensitive. The decision on trade mark infringement required forensic assessment of the types and text of prompts creating the allegedly infringing watermarks, as well as modifications of subsequent versions of the AI model. The court held that each instance of creation of a synthetic watermark would have to be decided on its own facts. Despite the case being confined to its own facts, the ruling nevertheless offers useful guidance on trade mark infringement by AI platforms and, in particular, on evidence which trade mark owners will need to gather to increase the chances of a successful claim. Written by Anna Skurczynska, partner at Open Plan Law.

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is no longer maintained. It contains closed legislative proposals, published judgments and closed consultations from 2017–2022 that are no longer featured in the current Trade marks tracker—UK and Trade marks tracker—EU because they are not from the current year. To track the progress of current legislative proposals, relevant judgments, consultations, guidance and reports related to trade marks, see Practice Notes: Trade marks tracker—UK and Trade marks tracker—EU. For archived content relating to UK trade marks from 2023–2024, see Practice Note: Trade marks tracker—UK 2023–2024 [Archived]. Legislation For current legislation, see Practice Notes: Trade marks tracker—UK—Legislation, consultations, guidance and reports and Trade marks tracker—EU—Legislation, consultations, guidance and reports. For archived legislation, consultations, guidance and reports relating to UK trade marks from 2023–2024, see Practice Note: Trade marks tracker—UK 2023–2024 [Archived]—Legislation, consultations, guidance and reports. What's happening? When? Find out more Trade Mark (Amendment) Regulations 2022, SI 2022/1303 27 December 2022: In force6 December 2022: Made26 October 2022: House of Commons debate14 September 2022:

This Practice Note tracks the progress of EU trade mark judgments, legislative proposals, and current EU consultations, guidance and reports related to trade marks. For information about UK trade mark judgments, legislative proposals and current UK consultations, guidance and reports related to trade marks, see Practice Note: Trade marks tracker—UK. For archived items on trade marks in the EU, see Practice Notes: Trade marks tracker—EU 2023–2024 [Archived] and Trade marks tracker 2017–2022 [Archived]. Legislation, consultations, guidance and reports For archived trade mark legislation, see Practice Note: Trade marks tracker—EU 2023–2024 [Archived]—Legislation, consultations, guidance and reports. For archived content prior to 2023, see Practice Note: Trade marks tracker 2017–2022 [Archived]. What's happening? When? Find out more EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) guidelines 1 July 2026: In force The EUIPO has announced that the 2026 edition of its Guidelines for Examination of EUTMs and registered EU designs entered into force on 1 July 2026. The updated Guidelines reflect the EUIPO’s examination practice following consultation with stakeholders and the EUIPO Management Board and incorporate legislative changes, recent case

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is no longer maintained. It contains closed legislative proposals, published judgments and closed consultations from 2023–24 that are no longer featured in the current Trade marks tracker—EU because they are not from the current year. To track the progress of current legislative proposals, relevant judgments, consultations, guidance and reports related to trade marks in the EU, see Practice Note: Trade marks tracker—EU. For archived developments prior to 2023, see Practice Note: Trade marks tracker 2017–2022 [Archived]. Legislation, consultations, guidance and reports For current legislation, consultations, guidance and reports, see: Trade marks tracker—EU—Legislation, consultations, guidance and reports. For archived developments prior to 2023, see Practice Note: Trade marks tracker 2017–2022 [Archived]. What's happening? When? Find out more Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2399 of 12 September 2024 amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 1352/2013 establishing the forms provided for in Regulation (EU) 608/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning customs enforcement of intellectual property rights 3 October 2024: In force12 September 2024:

This Practice Note tracks the progress of UK trade mark judgments, legislative proposals, and current UK consultations, guidance and reports related to trade marks. For information about EU trade mark (EUTM) judgments, legislative proposals and current EU consultations, guidance and reports related to trade marks, see Practice Note: Trade marks tracker—EU. For archived items on trade marks, see Practice Notes: Trade marks tracker—UK 2023–2024 [Archived] and Trade marks tracker 2017–2022 [Archived]. Legislation, consultations, guidance and reports For archived trade mark legislation, see Practice Notes: Trade marks tracker—UK 2023–2024 [Archived]—Legislation, consultations, guidance and reports and Trade marks tracker 2017–2022 [Archived]—Legislation. For archived trade mark consultations, see Practice Notes: Trade marks tracker—UK 2023–2024 [Archived]—Legislation, consultations, guidance and reports and Trade marks tracker 2017–2022 [Archived]—Consultations. For more information about the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 (REUL(RR)A 2023), see Practice Note: Brexit legislation tracker [Archived], in particular, see section: Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023. For more information about the implications of REUL(RR)A 2023 for IP law, see Practice Note: Trade marks—UK/EU comparison. To track the progress

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is no longer maintained. It contains closed legislative proposals, published judgments and closed consultations from 2023–2024 that are no longer featured in the current Trade marks tracker—UK because they are not from the current year. To track the progress of current legislative proposals, relevant judgments, consultations, guidance and reports related to trade marks, see Practice Note: Trade marks tracker—UK. For archived developments prior to 2024, see Practice Note: Trade marks tracker 2017–2022 [Archived]. Legislation, consultations, guidance and reports For current legislation, see Practice Note: Trade marks tracker—UK—Legislation, consultations, guidance and reports. For archived trade mark legislation prior to 2024, see Practice Note: Trade marks tracker 2017–2022 [Archived]—Legislation. For archived trade mark consultations prior to 2024, see Practice Note: Trade marks tracker 2017–2022 [Archived]—Consultations. What's happening? When? Find out more Trade Marks (International Registration) (Amendment) Order 2024, SI 2024/1077 21 November 2024: In force31 October 2024: Laid before Parliament28 October 2024: Made This Order is made to amend the Trade Marks (International Registration)

EU analysis: The upcoming EmpCo Directive (Directive (EU) 2024/825 as regards empowering consumers for the green transition), part of the EU’s broader Green Deal initiative, introduces stricter rules to combat greenwashing and ensure environmental claims are trustworthy, verifiable, and fair. While the focus is on consumer protection, the consequences for trade mark owners (particularly those using environmental claims in trade marks, trade names, or product labels) are significant. Mareike Hunfeld of Hogan Lovells outlines five key areas where the new rules intersect with trade mark law, and the practical implications brand owners need to prepare for.

Background This Practice Note provides a high-level summary of key themes of comparison between the UK and EU in relation to trade marks that have arisen since the UK exited the EU on 31 December 2020 (IP completion day). It also analyses the impact of the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 (REUL(RR)A 2023) on trade mark law and compares the UK and EU regimes for the protection of geographical indications (GIs), and exhaustion of rights. For a comparison of other IP rights in the UK and EU, see Practice Notes: Patents and SPCs—UK/EU comparison, Designs—UK/EU comparison and Copyright and databases—UK/EU comparison. IP law is significantly harmonised across the EU. Prior to Brexit, many aspects of UK IP law were harmonised with the EU regime, and certain unitary EU IP rights (such as EU trade marks (EUTMs) and EU designs) were applicable and enforceable in the UK. As of 31 January 2020, the UK ceased to be an EU Member State. In accordance with the Withdrawal Agreement, the UK entered an implementation period of 11 months ending