REASONS AND EXAMPLES OF CANCELLATION OF TRADEMARK REGISTRATION IN THE REPUBLIC OF NORTH MACEDONIA
Keywords:
Trademark, absolute and relative reasons for the unsuitability of a markAbstract
Through the cases from the practice of the State Office for Industrial Property, the paper analyzes the legal solutions regarding the absolute reasons for refusal of a trademark in the Republic of North Macedonia. Although certain legal absolute regulations are the most common reasons for refusal of trademark registration, in practice there are also rare examples in which we have refusal of registration on other grounds but which are in accordance with appropriate legal solutions. In some cases we have references to other laws that prohibit trademark registration in general or prohibit registration without the permission of a competent authority. All these developments will be explained with specific examples. Although the practice of regulating trademark registration in the Republic of North Macedonia is based on a clearly understandable methodology, it can be concluded that in some cases, although there are multiple reasons for refusal, only some of them are listed in the explanation, which allows us to conclude that there is room for development and improvement of the practice
References
European Union Intellectual Property Office. (2026). Guidelines for examination of European Union trade marks, 2016–2017. EUIPO Guidelines.
Faraj, H., & Almajbari, M. (2024). The legal protection of trademarks (A comparative study). University of Benghazi.
Feng, Y. (2024). Analysis of the advantages of trademark registration offer compared with relying on unfair competition or passing-off to enforce rights over trademarks. Advances in Economics, Management and Political Sciences, 71(1), 23–28.
Kanojiya, D. (2022). Trademark infringement and revocation/cancellation of trademark. Law Article.
Krasnikov, A., & Jayachandran, S. (2022). Building brand assets: The role of trademark rights. Journal of Marketing, 59(5). American Marketing Association.
Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property and Competition Law Munich. (2011). Study on the overall functioning of the European trade mark system. MPI Final Report.
Myronenko, N. (2025). Some issues of improving the legal protection of trademarks. Theory and Practice of Intellectual Property, 2(2), 21–30.
Париска конвенција за заштита на индустриската сопственост од 20 март 1883 година, ревидирана во Брисел на 14 декември 1900 година, во Вашингтон на 2 јуни 1911 година, во Хаг на 6 ноември 1925 година, во Лондон на 2 јуни 1934 година, во Лисабон на 31 октомври 1958 година, во Стокхолм 14 јули 1967. (2011). Службен весник на РМ, бр. 5/74.
Поленак-Аќимовска, М., et al. (2003). Право на индустриска сопственост: Избор на текстови. Скопје: Правен факултет „Јустинијан Први“.
Reboul, Y., Polenak-Akimovska, M., & Naumovski, G. (2010). Introduction to trademarks and geographical indications. Skopje.
Regulation (EU) 2015/2424 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 on the Community trade mark and Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark, and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 2869/95 on the fees payable to the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs). (2015). Official Journal of the European Union.
Tarigan, R. H., Saidin, S., & Saigan, P. R. (2026). Law enforcement regarding the grounds of bad faith in trademark cancellation lawsuits. Journal of Progressive Law and Legal Studies, 4(2), 181–191.
Yang, C. C. (2023). Preventing indigenous elements from being registered as trademarks: A comparison of approaches across countries. Journal of Social Research, 2(8), 2826–2834.
Закон за индустриска сопственост. (2020). Службен весник на РСМ, бр. 31.
