Trademark Opposition Survey Offers Insights Across 72 Jurisdictions

The opposition system is a legal tool that enables third parties to challenge a trademark application and/or registration based on their pre-existing rights or on other grounds. The key advantage of this legal tool is its ability to make the trademark registration system “interactive.” It allows stakeholders, especially brand owners, to alert trademark registration authorities and to actively get involved. As a result, this tool can significantly contribute to maintaining the integrity of the trademark registry in every country and reducing the risk of trademark squatting.  

 INTA has long advocated for the introduction and improvement of opposition systems globally. To support this effort and gain a broad view of opposition systems around the world, in 2013, the Association issued a survey encompassing 100 jurisdictions, from which it developed the Trademark Opposition Guide.  

Published in July, the latest opposition survey summary report was initiated in 2019 to review the status of opposition systems and the harmonization of opposition procedures, and it covered 72 jurisdictions, including the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). The survey featured an extensive questionnaire to capture a detailed overview of a jurisdiction’s opposition procedure, providing intellectual property (IP) professionals worldwide with reliable data for informed decision making. 

From the outset, the Opposition Working Group of INTA’s Enforcement Committee focused on identifying best practices that would form the basis for learning and the Association’s advocacy in this area.  

Notably, the survey reveals that opposition is a standard component of the trademark registration procedure today. With very few exceptions, all surveyed jurisdictions allow rights holders and/or other interested parties to file an opposition before the trademark office. 

In terms of the grounds for opposition, all surveyed jurisdictions recognize the risk of confusion with a well-known mark or a prior registered mark as grounds for opposition. While trademark confusion, including squatting, remains the main reason for opposition filings, the survey indicates that most jurisdictions have adopted broader approaches, allowing opposition filings based on both absolute and relative grounds.  

Additionally, most jurisdictions recognize conflicts with pre-existing business names, personal names, industrial designs, copyrights, appellations of origin, geographic indications, and symbols protected by international conventions or national laws, including Article 6ter of the Paris Convention, as valid grounds for opposition.  

Interestingly, 34 out of 72 jurisdictions allow bad faith as an independent ground for opposition.  As noted, oppositions are filed in all jurisdictions before the IP office. The term “opposition” is understood primarily as a legal tool for challenging a trademark application. In other words, most jurisdictions provide for oppositions to be filed before the registration of the opposed mark, whereas in other jurisdictions, opposition proceedings occur after registration of the contested mark. 

It is remarkable that 33 jurisdictions permit any person to file an opposition, in contrast to the more common practice of accepting oppositions only from parties with legal interests. 

An encouraging finding is the efficiency of procedures in the surveyed jurisdictions, with authorities issuing decisions within an average of six months. In most jurisdictions, the opposition should be filed within two to three months from the date of publication of the application for registration. Essentially, all surveyed jurisdictions allow the applicant to file a counterstatement in response to the opposition. The standard deadline to submit a counterstatement is one to two months. Moreover, most jurisdictions allow the parties to reach a settlement agreement in opposition proceedings.   

Oral hearings in opposition proceedings are part of the process in only 25 surveyed jurisdictions. It is also striking that in most jurisdictions, the losing party is not liable to compensate the full cost of opposition proceedings. Typically, each party covers its own costs, unless specific costs are awarded. 

Appeals against the opposition decision must be filed before a court in most jurisdictions. 

Overall, the survey reveals an encouraging trend towards greater uniformity in opposition proceedings internationally. This trend is characterized by a broader set of available grounds for oppositions and shorter adjudication periods of on average approximately six months. Where the survey revealed areas of lesser harmonization, INTA will keep monitoring developments and advocating for best practices and standards benefiting trademark owners.  

Read the full INTA Oppositions Survey Summary. 

Although every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of this article, readers are urged to check independently on matters of specific concern or interest. 

© 2025 International Trademark Association