直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

European IP Blog

The Impact of Brexit - What We Know Now

June 29, 2016

Authored and Edited by Clare A. Cornell; Julia Anne Matheson

On 23rd June 2016 the UK public voted to leave the European Union. Despite the vote to leave the EU, the UK will continue to abide by EU laws until exit is finalized.

Before the process of leaving the EU can be put into motion, the UK will need to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which has yet to occur. Once Article 50 is invoked, it is expected that the terms of exit will take around 2 years to establish. This 2 year period is set in the Lisbon Treaty but can be extended with the agreement of the 27 remaining EU member countries.

During these next few months it will become clearer how the impact of leaving the EU will affect European intellectual property rights. Of particular significance will be whether the UK decides to join other trade agreements such as the European Free Trade Agreement, or be a part of the European Economic Area.

Below is a summary of the changes we can expect:

  • Until withdrawal from the EU is completed, all European rights will continue to have effect in the UK and new trade mark applications can be filed as normal. Whilst the terms of exit are negotiated we recommend that applicants consider parallel applications in the EU and the UK.
  • EU rights will not continue to have any legal effect in the UK once withdrawal from the EU has been completed. However, it is expected that a transitional procedure will be negotiated which will enable EU trade marks to be converted into UK national trade mark registrations without any loss of rights. It is not yet known whether this procedure will be automatic or will require an application to convert rights.
  • Pending negotiation of the terms of exit, we recommend holders of EU trade mark registrations use their marks in both the UK and in other EU member countries to avoid vulnerability to cancellation. Use in the UK is not likely to be considered sufficient use of an EU mark after the UK has left the EU. In addition, in the UK, it is likely that new use periods will be established to allow the holders of former EU rights to make use of their marks in the UK.
  • Once the UK has withdrawn from the EU, applicants requiring protection of trade marks in both the UK and the EU will be required to file two separate applications. Any holder of UK national rights and EU wide trade mark rights will need to make use of the mark in both the UK and the EU to avoid vulnerability to cancellation on the basis of non-use in the respective territories.

We also recommend that the terms of existing agreements and licenses be reviewed. Agreements and licenses where the scope is defined using the EU as a territorial description will be compromised by the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union and will require amendment.

Tags

Brexit, European Union (EU)

Related Practices

Trademark and Brand Management

Contacts

Clare A. Cornell
Partner
London
+44 (0)20 7864 2815
Email

Copyright © 2016 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. 


DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information. 

Related Insights

At the PTAB Blog

Discretion All the Way Down: USPTO Uses a Discretionary IPR Denial to Justify a    
§ 325(d) EPR Denial

May 28, 2026

Articles

Colorado Replaces Landmark AI Act: An Overview of the New SB 26-189 Framework

May 26, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Before the Holding, the Message: Director Squires Uses Magnolia Medical to Outline PTAB Discretionary Denial Policy Changes

May 20, 2026

Webinar

Changes at the PTAB from Settled Expectations to Real Parties in Interest to Director Involvement

May 18, 2026

Webinar

Articles

COPPA’s Amended Rule Is Now in Full Effect: What Operators Need to Know

May 15, 2026

Seminar

IP Strategy at the Crossroads: Technology, Enforcement, and Contracts

May 15, 2026

Taipei

Webinar

Implementation of Long-Arm Jurisdiction by the UPC Court and German National Courts: Strategic Considerations and Practical Implications

May 12, 2026

Webinar

Workshop

Protecting Innovation in the Life Sciences: Updates and Key Trends in Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology IP Law

May 7, 2026

Cambridge

Charitable

2026 National Inventors Hall of Fame Induction Ceremony

May 7, 2026

Washington, DC

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP