* DECREE-LAW NO.551 PERTAINING TO THE PROTECTION OF PATENT RIGHTS *
IN FORCE AS FROM JUNE 27, 1995
Provisions in bold, in Articles 43, 53, 57, new Article 73/A and Article 174
have been amended/added/repealed by Law No. 4128 of November 07, 1995.
PART ONE
Preliminary Provisions
SECTION ONE
Aim, Scope, Persons Entitled To Protection and Definitions
Aim and Scope
Article 1 :
The aim of this present Decree-Law is to protect the inventions by granting
1. Patents,
or
2. Utility Model Certificates,
in order to promote the inventive activity and to contribute to technical, economical and social
development by implementing the inventions in industry.
This present Decree-Law contains the principles, the rules and the conditions/requirements for
issuing Patents or Utility Model Certificates to inventions qualifying for grant of industrial
property right.
Persons Entitled To Protection
Article 2 :
The Protection conferred by this law is available to natural and legal persons who are domiciled or who have industrial or commercial establishments within the territory of the Republic of Turkey, or to the persons entitled to file applications under the provisions of the Paris Convention.
Natural or legal persons other than those referred to in the first paragraph of this present
Article, who are nationals of the States which accord legal or de facto protection to the
nationals of the Republic of Turkey shall enjoy, according to the reciprocity principle, patent
and/or utility model protection in Turkey.
Definitions
Article 3:
Within the meaning of this present Decree-Law, Institute means the Turkish Patent Institute
set-up in accordance of the Decree-Law No. 544.
Within the meaning of this present Decree-Law, “Paris Convention” is the international
Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property dated March 20, 1883.
2
Priority of Application of International Agreements
Article 4 :
Where International Agreements having entered into force according to the laws of the
Republic of Turkey, contain provisions which are preferential/more favorable to those of this
present Decree-Law, the persons referred to in Article 2 may request to benefit from such
preferential/more favorable provisions.
SECTION TWO
Patentability Requirements
Patentable Inventions
Article 5 :
Inventions which are novel, which surpass the State-of-the-Art and which are applicable in
industry shall be protected by patents.
Non-Patentable subject matter and Inventions
Article 6 :
The following, not being inventions as of their nature, shall remain outside the scope of this
present Decree-Law :
a/ Discoveries, scientific theories, mathematical methods;
b/ Plans, methods, schemes/rules for performing mental acts, for conducting business/trading
activity, and for playing games.
c/ Literary and artistic works, scientific works, creations having an esthetic characteristic,
computer programs.
d/ Methods involving no technical aspect, for collecting, arranging, offering/presenting and
transmitting information/data.
e/ Methods of diagnosis, therapy and surgery applying to human or animal body.
The provision under the paragraph one, subparagraph (e) of this present Article, shall apply
neither to the products and compositions (per se) used in connection with these methods nor to
their process of manufacturing.
Patent shall not be granted for inventions in respect of following subject matter.
a/ Inventions whose subject matter is contrary to the public order or to morality as is generally
accepted.
b/ Plant and animal varieties/species or processes for breeding/plant or animal
varieties/species, based mainly on biological grounds.
Novelty
Article 7 :
Any invention which is not part of/comprised in the State-of-the-Art shall be deemed to be
novel.
3
The State-of-the-Art shall be held to comprise information/data pertaining to the subject matter
of the invention, accessible to the public in any part of the world, before the date of filing of
the application for patent by disclosure whether in writing, or orally, by use or in any other
way.
Patent and Utility Model applications filed in Turkey prior to the date of filing of the
application for patent and published on or after that date are considered to be comprised in the
State-of-the-Art as of their first disclosed contents/texts.
Disclosures not affecting Patentability
Article 8 :
In the circumstances hereunder cited, disclosure of information which otherwise would affect
the patentability of an invention claimed in the application shall not affect the patentability of
that invention where the information was disclosed, during the 12 months preceding the date of
filing or, where priority is claimed, the date of priority of the application:
a/ by the inventor,
b/ by an office when the information was contained
(1) in another application filed by the inventor and which application should not have been
disclosed by the office, or
(2) in an application filed without the knowledge or consent of the inventor by a third party
which obtained the information directly or indirectly from the inventor or,
c/ by a third party which obtained the information directly or indirectly from the inventor.
According to the paragraph one of this present Article, shall be deemed inventor any person
who, at the date of filing the application, had the right to the patent.
The effects of paragraph one of this present Article are not limited to a term and may be
invoked at any time.
Where the applicability of paragraph one of this present Article is contested, the party invoking
that this paragraph must be applied shall have the burden of proving, that the conditions of that
paragraph are fulfilled or are expected to be fulfilled.
Surpassing the State-of-the-Art (involving inventive level/step)
Article 9 :
An invention shall be deemed to surpass the State-of-the-Art (to involve inventive
activity/step) when it is the result of an activity which is not obviously realizable from the
State-of-the-Art, by a person skilled in the concerned technical field.
Applicability in Industry
Article 10 :
An invention shall be regarded as being applicable in industry where it is susceptible to be
produced or used in any given field of industry, including agriculture.
4
PART TWO
Right to a Patent
Usurpation of the Right And Indication of the Inventor
Right to a Patent
Article 11 :
The right to a patent shall belong to the inventor or to his successor in title and shall be
transferable.
Where an invention has been made jointly by more than one person, if not foreseen otherwise
by the parties, the right to request a patent shall belong to them jointly.
Where an invention has been made independently by several persons at the same time, the
right to a patent shall belong to the person who has filed the first application or who can claim
an earlier priority right on others.
The person who is the first to apply for a patent shall be vested with the right to request the
patent until proof to the contrary is established.
Usurpation of the Right to a Patent
Article 12 :
A person claiming to be the rightfully vested with the right to request the patent; in conformity
with paragraph one of Article 11, may initiate legal proceedings against the applicant in
accordance with the provisions of Article 129. No claim may be raised before the Institute in
that the applicant is not the rightfully vested with the right to request the patent. Where the
court decision concerning the right to a patent is in favour of the plaintiff, the holder of the
right to a patent may request one of the following courses of action within three months after
the judgment has become res judicata.
a/ He may request that the prior application for patent subject to the court action in the matter
of usurpation of same, be accepted as his application and be further prosecuted as such.
b/ He may file a new application for the same invention by claiming the same date of priority.
Such an application will be prosecuted as of the date of filing of the first application. In
such a situation, the application subject to usurpation shall remain without effect.
c/ He may request that the application subject to usurpation be rejected.
The provisions of Paragraph three of Article 45 of this present Decree-Law, shall apply to
every new application filed in conformity with Paragraph one of this present Article.
Where a court action has been instituted in accordance with Paragraph one hereabove for
determining the right to a patent, the application may not be withdrawn without the consent of
the plaintiff. The court shall rule to suspend the patent granting procedure as from the date of
publication of the application until the date when the judgment becomes res judicata in the
5
case where the plaintiff’s claim is rejected and in the case where the plaintiff’s claim is
accepted within a period of three months subsequent to the date when the judgment becomes
res judicata.
Usurpation of a Patent
Article 13 :
Where a patent has been granted to a person other than the rightful owner according to
Paragraph one of Article 11, the person; claiming to be the rightfully vested, with such right;
may institute a court action claiming the transfer of ownership of the patent without prejudice
to his other rights and claims conferred by the patent.
Where only partial right to the patent is claimed, a court action may be instituted claiming that
joint ownership on the patent be recognized in accordance with paragraph one of this present
Article.
The right to raise such a claim and institute such a court action according to Paragraph one and
two of this present Article, shall be exercised within two years following the date of
publication of the patent, or in case of bad faith, until the expiry of the term of protection of the
patent.
At the request of the interested party, the court action instituted according to the present
Article and the claims put forward therein, the final ruling or any other action concluding the
court action shall be entered in the Patent Register in order to have effect against third parties.
Consequences of Termination of Usurpation
Article 14 :
Where the ownership of a patent changes in conformity with Article 13, any license granted or
other rights benefiting to third persons on the patent shall expire with the entry of said change
of ownership in the Patent Register.
Where, prior to the entry of the rightful patent owner in the Patent Register in conformity with
Paragraph one of this present Article, the person who subsequently is understood to be the
unrightful owner of the patent or a person who has been granted a license for the patent,
subject to the court action, prior to the institution of same, have put the said patent to use or
have taken effective and concrete steps for that purpose, may request from the rightful patent
owner(s) the grant of a non-exclusive license.
Such a request may be filed within a period of two months, in the case of the person appearing
as the former owner in the Patent Register, or, in the case of the licensee, within a period of
four months. Said periods run as from the date when the Institute notifies the interested parties
of date of the entry of the rightful patent owner in the Patent Register.
The license granted in accordance with Paragraph two of this present Article shall be granted
for a reasonable period and under fair conditions. In determining such period and conditions,
the provisions concerning the grant of compulsory licenses shall apply likewise.
6
The provisions set forth in Paragraphs two and three of this present Article shall not apply,
where the owner of the patent or the licensee, at the time, when they have commenced putting
the patent to use or making serious preparations for such use have acted in bad faith.
Indication of the Inventor
Article 15 :
The name of the inventor shall be indicated in the letter’s patent. The inventor shall have the
right to request from the applicant or the patentee to be indicated as the inventor in the letter’s
patent.
PART THREE
Employee’s Inventions
SECTION ONE
The Concept of Employee Inventions
Article 16 :
Employee inventions within the meaning of this present Decree-Law are those inventions
qualifying for protection under a Patent or a Utility Model Certificate.
Technical improvement proposals do not qualify for protection under a Patent or a Utility
Model Certificate.
Within the meaning of this present Decree-Law, an employee is a person who is in the service
of another person and is responsible to carry out the work specified by the employer, with
personal liability against the employer, in accordance with the provisions of a private legal
contract or a legal relationship of similar nature. Trainees and students serving and undergoing
a practical training who are not receiving a payment and are not bound to a specific working
period are also considered as employees according to the provisions of this present DecreeLaw.
Concept of Service Inventions and Free Inventions
Article 17 :
Within the meaning of this present Decree-Law, employee’s inventions are classified as service
inventions or free inventions.
Service inventions are those inventions which are made by the employee during the term of his
employment, in a private enterprise or public authority, while performing, as of his obligation,
the task (s)he has been assigned to or which are based to a great extent on the experience and
work/activity of the private enterprise or public authority.
7
Employee’s inventions not falling under the scope of inventions referred to in Paragraph two
hereabove, shall be deemed to be free inventions. Free inventions are subject to the provisions
of Articles 31 and 32.
Service Inventions and Duty to Report
Article 18 :
An employee having made a service invention shall be under the duty to report, without delay,
the invention to his employer, in writing. Where the invention has been made by more that one
employee, such report to the employer can be jointly made. The employer shall notify without
delay and in writing the persons(s) having made such report, the date when same has been
received at his end.
In the report, the employee is under the obligation to disclose the technical problem, its
solution and how the service invention was realized. For the better understanding of the
invention, the employee shall provide the employer with the drawing(s) of the invention, if
any.
The employee shall furthermore specify the experience and activities/work of the enterprise
from which he has benefited; if any, the contributions of other employees, the nature/form of
such contributions, the instructions he received in respect of his work and with regard to said
contributions and the contributions which he considers to be his own.
The employer shall, within two months as from the date of receipt of the employee’s report,
inform same of the corrections he deems necessary to be made therein. Where the employer
fails to request for the correction of the report within the foreseen period of two months, the
report referred to in Paragraph two of this present Article, shall be deemed to be (legally)
valid/effective even when it fails to meet the requirements.
The employer is under the obligation to provide the assistance necessary for enabling the
employee to report in compliance with this present Decree-Law.
Employer’s Right on an Invention
Article 19 :
An employer may claim a right, in part or in whole, for a service invention.
The employer shall notify the employee of his claim, in writing. Such claim must be made
within four months as from the date of receipt by the employer of the employee’s report.
Effect and Consequences of the Claim
Article 20 :
Where the employer claims ownership in whole on the service invention, with the notification
of the declaration (in writing), to this effect, to the employee, all rights on the service invention
shall pass to the employer.
Where the employer claims partial ownership on the service invention, the employer may use
the invention on the basis on his partial claim. Should such use by the employer considerably
impede employee’s further exploitation of his invention, the employee may request that, within
8
a period of two months, his employer either takes over, in whole, the service invention or
releases it free in his favour.
Dispositions on a service invention made by an employee prior to his employer making a claim
in respect thereof, shall have no effect against the employer where such dispositions infringe
the rights of the employer.
Service Inventions Becoming Free Inventions
Article 21 :
A service invention shall become a free invention under the following situations:
a/ where the employer releases a service invention free under a statement in writing;
b/ where the employer makes a claim for part of the service invention;
c/ where the employer has not made a claim to the service invention within four months upon
receiving the report of the employee made according to Article 18 or, has not replied within
two months to the proposal made according to Paragraph two of Article 20;
The fact that an invention has become free according to Paragraph one (b), of this present
Article, shall not affect the right of the employer to make use of same in accordance with
Paragraph two of Article 20.
The employee may dispose, as of his free will, of a service invention that has become a free
invention, without being subject to the provisions of Articles 31 and 32.
Compensation for Claim of Whole Ownership
Article 22 :
Where the employer claims ownership in whole on the service invention, the employee shall
have the right to a reasonable compensation as against the employer.
In assessing compensation, due consideration shall in particular be given to the
economical/commercial applicability of the service invention, the duties of the employee in the
enterprise and the enterprise’s contribution to the invention.
Compensation for Claim of Partial Ownership
Article 23 :
Where the employer claims partial ownership on a service invention and uses such invention,
the employee may demand a reasonable compensation. In assessing such compensation,
Paragraph two of Article 22 shall apply.
After having stated a claim to a service invention, an employer may not avoid the payment of
the compensation by contesting that the invention is not worth protection. Where the Institute
or, in case the Institute is sued, the court decides that the invention is not patentable, the
employee may not demand compensation. The employee’s right to such compensation may be
claimed until the decision as to the patentability of the invention becomes res judicata.
Determination of Compensation in the Regulation and Arbitration Procedure
Article 24 :
9
The compensation tariff pertaining to employee’s invention and the arbitration procedure to be
followed in case of disagreement shall be determined in the Regulation which will be
published by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security within three months following the
enactment of this present Decree-Law and after having consulted the professional
organizations of employees and employers.
Modality for determining the Compensation
Article 25 :
The amount and the modality of payment of the compensation shall be determined by the
parties in compliance with the provisions of the Regulation indicated in Article 24 after the
employer has claimed ownership in full or in part on the service invention.
Where the parties fail to reach an agreement to determine the amount of the compensation and
the modality of payment within thirty days in compliance with the provisions of the
Regulation, the disagreement shall be settled by arbitration within sixty days.
The decision of arbitration shall be binding upon both parties.
Where two or more employees have contributed to a service invention, the amount of the
compensation and the modality of payment shall be determined separately for each of them in
accordance with the above provision.
The provisions, if any, of the employment contract, in respect thereof favourable to the
employee shall apply.
Employer’s Obligation to Apply for Domestic Patent
Article 26 :
An employer shall be entitled and under obligation to apply before the Institute for grant of a
domestic patent for a service invention reported to him. Where the protection of the invention
with a utility model certificate appears to be more appropriate, the employer is under
obligation to file without delay an application for the protection of a patentable invention with
a utility model certificate.
An employer’s obligation to file such an application shall terminate under the following
circumstances:
1. where the service invention has become free;
2. where the employee has agreed that no application is to be filed;
3. where the confidentiality of the operational secrets of the enterprise requires that a an
application shall not be filed.
Where, after claiming full ownership on a service invention, an employer does not comply
with his obligation to file an application and also fails to do so within a reasonable time-period
set by the employee, the employee may file an application before the Institute for the service
invention in the name and on behalf of the employer.
Where a service invention has become free, the employee shall be entitled to file an application
in his own name. Had the employer already filed an application for the protection of the
10
service invention, the rights resulting from such application shall pass to the employee, when
the invention is released free.
Filing an Application for a Service Invention in a Foreign Country
Article 27 :
After claiming full ownership on a service invention, an employer shall be entitled to apply for
the protection of the subject invention in a foreign country.
For foreign countries in which an employer does not wish to obtain a patent, he is under the
obligation to release free the service invention to the employee and shall enable the employee
to apply for a patent in said countries. The invention is to be released free within a reasonable
time-period to allow the employee to benefit from the deadlines for priority right(s) under
international treaties.
The employer may reserve for himself a non-exclusive right to use the service invention
against reasonable compensation in the foreign countries where he has released the invention
free in order to enable the employee to obtain a letter’s patent for same, and shall have the right
to claim that the interests he has reserved to himself shall not be damaged in the concerned
countries.
Parties’ Mutual Rights and Obligations in Acquiring the Right to Patent
Article 28 :
Upon filing an application for patent for a service invention, an employer must give his
employee copies of the filing petition and its enclosures and, if requested by the employee,
must keep his employee informed of the progress of the application procedure.
The employee is under the obligation to assist his employer for obtaining a patent and to
provide the information necessary to this effect.
Duties Resulting from an Application for Patent or from a Patent
Article 29 :
Where an employer, before meeting his employee’s demand for reasonable compensation for
the service invention, intends to discontinue prosecuting an application for patent or to
surrender patent protection, he must inform his employee accordingly. At the employee’s
request and expense, the employer must assign the patent right to him and turn over to him any
documents necessary to obtain a patent and to maintain same. An employer shall be entitled to
surrender his rights resulting from an application for patent or a patent, where the employee
does not reply within three months from receipt of the communication made to him in this
respect.
Simultaneously with the communication made in the first paragraph, the employer can reserve
to himself a non-exclusive right to use the service invention against a reasonable
compensation.
Refraining from Filing an Application for Patent
Article 30 :
11
Where the interests of the enterprise so require, the employer may refrain from filing an
application for patent, for inventions reported to him, which he believes, are legally patentable
and keep them secret.
In determining the compensation for an invention under paragraph one of this present Article,
account must also be taken of the potential economic losses/disadvantages that might affect the
employee for not obtaining a patent for the invention.
Free Inventions and Obligation to Notify
Article 31 :
An employee who has made a free invention during the term of an employment contract shall
notify the employer without delay. In the notification, the employer shall give the employer all
the details concerning the invention and, if necessary concerning its realization, which the
employer may need in order to assess whether it is in fact a free invention.
Where the employer does not contest, in writing, to the employee that the invention notified to
him is a free invention within three months of the notification, he may not put forward the
claim thereafter in that the invention is a service invention.
There shall be no obligation to notify the employer of a free invention where the invention is
obviously not capable of being used in the employer’s field of activity.
Obligation to Offer
Article 32 :
Before exploiting in another way a free invention further, during the term of his employment
contract, an employee is under the obligation to make an offer his employer, on a nonexclusive
basis to benefit from the invention on reasonable terms, where the invention falls
within the field of activity of the employer’s enterprise or where the employer’s enterprise is
making serious attempts to become active in the field of the invention. The employer may
submit such offer together with the notification to be made in compliance with the provisions
of Paragraph one of Article 31.
Where the employer does not reply to the offer within three months of its receipt, he shall
loose his right of precedence on the matter.
Where the employer accepts the offer within the period prescribed in the paragraph above, but
does not find the terms acceptable, the court shall determine the terms upon the request of the
parties.
Where important changes come to affect the points taken into consideration in determining the
amount and other conditions of the agreement, the employer or the employee may request from
the court that the terms of the agreement be adapted to the new circumstances.
Technical Improvement Proposals
Article 33 :
In compliance with the provisions of this present Decree-Law, for technical improvement
proposals which are not subject to protection by a letter’s patent or a utility model certificate,
12
the employer is under obligation to pay reasonable compensation to the employee provided he
makes use of the proposal upon the written notification of his employee. The Provisions of
Article 18 concerning the obligation to report and Articles 22 and 25 concerning the
determining of compensation in respect of service inventions shall apply by analogy.
All other matters concerning technical improvement proposals shall be regulated under
individual or collective employment contracts.
SECTION TWO
Common Provisions Concerning Employee’s Inventions
Mandatory Nature of Provisions Concerning Employee’s Inventions
Article 34 :
The provisions of this present Decree-Law relating to employees may not be modified to the
detriment of same. Agreements concerning employee’s inventions shall be permissible, in case
of service inventions after the application for patent has been filed, or in case of free inventions
and technical improvement proposals after their notification to the employer.
Condition to Comply With Equity
Article 35 :
Agreements between the employer and employee concerning service inventions, free
inventions, or technical improvement proposals shall be null and void to the extent that they
are manifestly inequitable, although they may not violate the mandatory provisions pertaining
to employee inventions. This rule shall apply also to the amount of compensation.
Where objections as to the inequity of an agreement or the amount of compensation are not
raised in writing within six month following termination of the employment contract, no
objections as to inequity may be raised thereafter.
Obligation to respect Secrecy
Article 36 :
An employer shall keep confidential/secret the information/data concerning an employee’s
invention that has been reported or notified to him, for as long as required by the legitimate
interests of the employee.
An employee must keep a service invention confidential/secret as long as it has not become
free.
Persons other than the employer or the employee who have knowledge of an invention on the
basis of this present Decree-Law may neither use the invention nor disclose it to others.
Effects of Obligations
Article 37 :
General obligations arising for the employer and employee under their employment
relationship shall not be affected by the provisions concerning employee’s inventions or
13
technical improvement proposals unless further effects arise other than the invention becoming
free.
The rights and obligations arising from provisions concerning employee’s inventions and
technical improvement proposals shall not be affected by termination of the employment
relationship.
Employee’s Right of Preemption
Article 38 :
Where the employer goes bankrupt and the trustee in bankruptcy of the estate wishes to
dispose the invention independently of the enterprise, the employee shall have a right of
preemption to acquire his own service inventions for which the employer has claimed full
ownership.
The amount of compensation due, resulting from employee’s inventions or technical
improvement proposals shall be considered as privileged credit. Where, there are more than
one such privileged credits, the trustee in bankruptcy shall distribute pro rata such credits.
14
SECTION THREE
Inventions Made by Employees in Public Service
Inventions and Technical Improvement Proposals of Employees in Public Service
Article 39 :
The provisions applying to inventions and technical improvement proposal of employees
subject to private contractual relation, without prejudice to the privately agreed dispositions,
shall apply, likewise, to the inventions and technical improvement proposals of employees
employed in state owned enterprises and other public establishements/bodies and their
affiliates whether with general or added or private budgets.
Inventions of the Armed Forces Personnel
Article 40 :
The provisions relating to employees in public service shall apply, likewise, to inventions and
technical improvement proposals made by members of the armed forces.
Inventions of University Staff
Article 41 :
In derogation from the provisions of Articles 40 and 41, inventions made by the teaching staff
of universities during their scientific studies at universities or higher schools shall be free
inventions.
Concerning such inventions the provisions of Articles 31, 32 and 34 shall not apply. The
notion of university teaching staff shall be determined in accordance with the provisions the
Law on Higher Education.
Where the subject educational body has made available specific equipment and means for the
research work having led to the invention, the university teaching staff shall notify the
educational body, in writing, of the exploitation of the invention and shall, upon request of the
body, specify the modality of exploitation and the amount of proceeds achieved. Within three
months of such written notification, the educational body may demand a reasonable share of
the proceeds from the invention. The amount of such share shall however not exceed the
expenses supported by the body.
PART FOUR
Granting a Patent
SECTION ONE
Application for a Patent and Requirements thereof
Application for a Patent and Annexes
Article 42 :
In order to obtain a patent, it shall be necessary to file an application complying with the form
and scope of the Regulation and comprising the following :
15
a/ application petition;
b/ description specifying the invention;
c/ claim(s) covering the elements of the invention for which protection is sought;
d/ drawings referred to in the description, in the claim(s);
e/ abstract;
f/ receipt showing the payment of the application fee.
Where a patent-of-addition is to be filed in accordance with Article 121, the number of the
(main) patent or the application for patent to which the addition refers shall be indicated.
The validity of an application for patent shall be subject to payment of the application fee
prescribed in this present Decree-Law within seven days, at the latest, from the date of filing of
the application, without the need to extend (to the applicant) any further notice to this effect.
The application shall be deemed to have been withdrawn where the application fee remains
unsettled within such time-period.
Any documents submitted to the Institute simultaneously with the filing of the application or
thereafter shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Regulation of the present DecreeLaw.
The description and claim(s) may be filed in English, French and German simultaneously with
the application. A term of one month shall be given for translating them into Turkish and filing
the Turkish translation before the Institute or an authority designated by it without the need to
extend (to the applicant) any further notice to this effect. For the filing of the corresponding
Turkish translation, the fee set forth in the Regulation shall be paid.
Fixing the Date of Application
Article 43 :
The date of filing of the application for patent becomes definite (is fixed) on the date, hour and
minute when the applicant files before the Turkish Patent Institute or the authority designated
by same the following documents drawn up in the form specified in the regulation :
a/ an application petition, a description and one or more claim(s) in Turkish or in one of the
foreign languages indicated in Article 42, even when they do not meet the formal
requirements set forth in this present Decree-Law and in the regulation.
b/ drawings referred to in the description, in the claim(s).
Where during the examination of the application for patent, the subject matter of the invention
for which patent is requested is amended/changed, whether in whole or in part, so as to
expand out of the contents of the application as initially filed, the date of application shall
be deemed to be the date when the petition for such amendment/change is filed.
Obligation to Indicate in the Application the Inventor
Article 44 :
The inventor shall be indicated in the application. Where the applicant is not the inventor or
the sole inventor, the applicant shall declare in the application how he has acquired, from the
inventor or inventors the right to apply for a patent.
16
Where the inventor is not mentioned or no declaration is made as to how the applicant acquired
the right to apply for a patent, the examination of the application shall not be initiated.
Unity of the Invention
Article 45 :
The application for patent consists either of one single invention or of a number of inventions
realized around a principal inventive idea of general nature and related to each other by said
principal inventive idea.
Applications not conforming to Paragraph one of this present Article are divided into
divisional applications in accordance with the provisions set forth in the Regulation.
Each divisional application shall have the same date of filing as the initial application provided
that their subject matter remains within the scope of same. Where priority is claimed for the
initial application, each divisional application will benefit from the priority right or rights
claimed for the initial application.
Explicitness of the Description
Article 46 :
The description must be written in a sufficiently explicit and comprehensive manner so as to
enable a person skilled in the technical field of the subject matter to implement the invention.
Where the invention pertains to a microbiological process and the related microorganism is not
accessible to those interested, the description shall only be deemed to fulfill the requirements
specified under the Paragraph one of this present Article provided the following conditions are
met:
a/ the description contains the information regarding the characteristics of the microorganism;
b/ the applicant has deposited, no later than the date of filing the application, a culture of the
microorganism with an authorized institution, established in accordance with international
conventions.
The said institution shall be mentioned in the publication in compliance with Paragraph two of
Article 55.
Patent Claims
Article 47 :
The application should contain one or more claims.
The claim(s) shall define the elements of the invention for which protection is sought. Each
claim shall be explicit and concise to the point. The claim(s) shall be based on the application.
The claim(s) may not extend beyond the subject matter of the invention as specified in the
description. The claim(s) shall be written/prepared in compliance with the provisions of the
Regulation.
17
The applicant may write/prepare the claim(s) in compliance with the provisions of the
Regulation or in another form.
Abstract
Article 48 :
The abstract serves the sole purpose to provide technical information and may not be used for
other purposes.
Especially, the abstract may not be used to define the scope of the protection and to delimit the
boundaries of the State-of-the-Art. The Institute may modify the abstract where it considers it
necessary for providing better information to third parties. Such modification shall be notified
to the applicant.
Priority Rights arising from applications filed according to International Conventions
Article 49 :
Natural or legal persons who are nationals of any State party to the Paris Convention, or when
not nationals, who are domiciled or have an active business in these States, shall enjoy a right
of priority of twelve months as from the date of filing an application for the grant of a patent or
a utility model certificate before the authorised bodies of these States, for the purpose of filing
an application for obtaining a letter’s patent or utility model certificate in Turkey.
Priority rights not exercised within the time-period of twelve months prescribed in Paragraph
one of this present Article are considered to be void.
Where an application claiming priority, within the time-period prescribed in Paragraph one of
this present Article, is filed, all applications filed by third parties and patents and utility model
certificates granted therefor in respect of the patent or utility model certificate subject to the
priority right, shall be declared invalid as from the date of priority right.
Natural or legal persons who are nationals of countries benefiting from the reciprocity
principle prescribed in Paragraph two of Article two shall enjoy, within the provisions of this
present Article, priority right.
Where a natural or a legal person who is a national of a state party to the Paris Convention has
filed a valid application in a state not party to the Paris Convention he shall enjoy within the
provisions of this present Article priority right in respect of that application.
The priority right shall have effect as of the date of filing the application for patent or utility
model certificate.
Rights Arising from Display in Exhibitions
Article 50:
Natural or legal persons specified in paragraph one of Article 49 who have displayed the
products subject to a patent or a utility model certificate at national or international exhibitions
held in Turkey or at, official or officially recognized, national or international exhibitions held
in the states party to the Paris Convention, are entitled to claim a right of priority when the
18
application for a patent or utility model is filed within a period of twelve months from the date
of the display in the exhibition.
Where the product constituting the subject matter of a patent or utility model certificate has
been displayed at the exhibition, before the official opening date, right of priority shall run
from the date when the product was first displayed at the exhibition. The paragraphs two and
three of Article 49 shall apply by analogy.
The authorized organs of the exhibitions held in Turkey, in accordance with paragraph one of
this present Article, shall supply evidence to the persons displaying their products subject to a
patent or a utility model certificate, by specifying the product subject to a patent or a utility
model certificate clearly and comprehensively, including at least four photographs identifying
same from the sides, the front, the rear and the bottom and indicating the type of the product
and the date when same has been, visibly, displayed at the exhibition and the official opening
date of the exhibition.
In order to enjoy the priority right of a product exhibited in foreign countries, it shall be
necessary to submit evidence as specified in the third paragraph and to be obtained from the
relevant authorities of the country where the exhibition was held.
Products subject to an application for patent or a patent or a utility model certificate cannot be
prevented from being displayed at an exhibition held in Turkey and from being returned to
their country of origin after the closing of the exhibition.
Where more than one applications have been filed for a patent or a utility model certificate
with subject matter identical or similar to a product displayed in an exhibition, the applicant
who first displayed such a product, and if displayed at the same time, the one who filed his
application, firstly, shall enjoy the right of priority.
Effect of Priority Right
Article 51:
The effects of the priority rights ensuing from Articles 49 and 50, shall arise as of the date of
filing of the application wherein priority is claimed.
Claiming and Evidencing of Priority
Article 52 :
An Applicant desiring to benefit from a right of priority shall file a claim of priority
simultaneously with his application or within two months as from the date of filing his
application. Where the right of priority is not documented within three months of the date of
filing of the application, the claim to benefit from such priority shall be deemed not to have
been made.
Multiple priorities may be claimed regardless of the fact that the application for a patent filed
in foreign countries originates from different countries.
Multiple priorities may be claimed in an application for patent.
19
Where multiple priorities are claimed, the time-period runs from the earliest date of priority.
Where one or more than one priorities are claimed, the right of priority shall comprise in its
scope only those aspects contained in the application(s) originating the right of priority.
Even though the claims of the application, the priority originates from do not include certain
elements of the invention, in the application filed claiming the priority of such an application,
the priority right may still be granted for such claims provided, such elements (of the
invention) are, explicitly and unequivocally indicated in the description of the application the
priority originates from.
SECTION TWO
Examination of an Application
Rejection of an application
Article 53 :
The date of filing of an application becomes definite (is fixed) provided the application
complies with the conditions set forth in Article 43. The Institute shall reject an application
and shall notify the interested party (applicant) of its decision of rejection when the application
does not comply with the conditions set forth in Article 43 or when the application fee is not
paid within seven days (following the date of filing of the application) or when the Turkish
translations of the description and claim(s) submitted in one of the foreign languages
mentioned in Article 42 are not filed within the subsequent one month.
Examination as to Formal Requirements,
Article 54 :
Upon the date of filing of an application becoming definite, the Institute shall examine the
compliance of the application to the formal requirements set forth in Articles 42 to 52 and in
the Regulation.
The compliance of the specification, claim(s) and drawing(s) to the patentability requirements
is not comprised to be within the scope of this examination. The Institute shall examine the
subject matter of the application, as of Articles 6 and 10 of this present Decree-Law, to
determine whether or not it consists of an invention which is subject to patent protection and
which is applicable in industry. The Institute after receiving/hearing the opinion to the contrary
of the interested party (applicant) and, duly motivating its decision, shall reject the application
when the invention, subject matter of the application, obviously and unequivocally lacks the
characteristics of novelty and applicability in industry.
Where the examination results in that, the application suffers formal deficiencies, in terms of
the provisions of Article 53, or that its subject matter is not an invention subject to patent
protection, the examination procedure is suspended and the applicant is requested to remedy
the deficiencies or to notify the Institute his objections within the period set forth in the
Regulation.
In the course of this procedure, the applicant may amend the claim(s) or divide the application
into more than one divisional application(s).
20
The Institute shall reject the application, in whole or in part, in consideration of the claim(s),
when it does not find acceptable the objections raised against its decision, according to which,
the subject matter of the application is not an invention subject to patent protection or when the
existing deficiency has not been remedied, in compliance with the conditions and formal
requirements as set forth in the Regulation.
Where the examination conducted by the Institute according to this Article shows that there is
no deficiency as to formal requirements or when any such deficiency has been duly remedied
and completed in accordance with the requirements of this present Decree-Law, the Institute
shall inform the applicant that the request, if not filed earlier, for conducting the Search on the
State-of-the Art, is to be filed within the time-period set forth in Article 56.
Publication of an Application
Article 55 :
The application shall be open to public inspection upon its publication, in accordance with the
provisions of the Regulation, after the elapsing of a period of eighteen months from the date of
filing of the application or, if any, from the date of the priority claimed. The application is
published subsequent to the conclusion by the Institute of the examination pertaining to the
compliance with the formal requirements as of the provisions of Article 54 and subsequent to
the filing, according to Article 56, of the request for conducting the Search on the State-of-theArt.
The applications are published, periodically in the relevant Bulletin, to include the particulars
of same under the form/modality and conditions as set forth in the Regulation.
At the request of the applicant, the application is published in accordance with the conditions
set forth in this present Article, even when the period of eighteen months mentioned under
paragraph one of this present Article has not expired.
Request for Conducting Search on the State-of-the-Art and Payment of the related Search Fee
Article 56 :
Within 15 months from the date of filing of the application, the applicant shall file before the
Institute the request to conduct the Search on the State-of-the-Art and shall pay the relevant
fee.
Where priority is claimed, such period (of 15 months) runs as from the date of priority.
Where the period prescribed in the first paragraph of this present Article has already expired, at
the time when the notification, according to Article 54, paragraph six, is made, the applicant
shall file the request to conduct the Search on the State-of-the-Art within the month following
such notification.
Where the applicant does not file the request to conduct the Search on the State-of-the-Art in
compliance with the provisions of this present Article, the application shall be deemed to have
been withdrawn.
21
Conducting Search on the State-of-the-Art in respect of an application for a patent-of-addition
can only be requested when such request is filed simultaneously with the application for the
main patent or when a search has already been conducted or requested in respect of previous
application(s) for patent-of-addition. The provisions of the first and fourth paragraphs of this
present Article apply likewise to patents-of-addition.
Establishment, Notification and Publication of Search Report on the State-of-the-Art
Article 57 :
The Institute shall conduct the Search on the State-of-the-Art subsequent to the examination of
the application in accordance with the provisions of Article 54 and to the request filed by the
applicant, according to Article 56, for conducting the Search on the State-of-the-Art.
The Search Report on the State-of-the-Art shall include those elements of the State-of-the-Art
for assessing/supporting the characteristics of novelty and inventive activity/step of the
invention constituting the subject matter of the application.
The Search Report shall be established; in consideration of the specification, the drawing(s), if
any, and the claim(s); by the Institute or by the Search Authority to be designated by the
Institute from amongst the internationally recognized search authorities.
The Search Report shall be notified to the applicant after it has been established. The copies of
the reference patents and publications cited in the Search Report are transmitted to the
applicant together with the Report.
Following its notification to the applicant, the Search Report shall be published by the
Institute, after the elapsing of a period of three-months as recognized to the applicant under the
provision of Article 59.
Of the systems for granting patent with or without (substantive) examination, the one which
the applicant has opted for shall be published in the related Bulletin where the Search Report
on the State-of-the-Art is published.
At the time, when the Search Report is established, had an application for patent not been
published earlier, the Search Report shall be published together with the application for patent.
Impossibility to establish Search Report for reasons of deficiency
Article 58 :
Where lack of sufficient explicitness in the description or claim(s), prevents the establishment,
in whole or in part, of the Search Report on the State-of-the-Art, the Institute shall ask the
applicant to remedy such deficiency. Where the deficiency is not remedied, by the applicant,
within the time-period set forth in the Regulation, the Institute shall notify the applicant its
decision in that the Search Report can not be established by pointing out to the right of the
applicant to object. In case of partial deficiency, the Search Report shall be established for
those claim(s) which are explicit enough.
Opting for the (Substantive) Examination System.
22
Article 59 :
The applicant shall declare to the Institute, within three months following the notification to
him of the Search Report that he opts for the system for granting patent with (substantive)
examination, to permit the Institute to examine the application as of the patentability
requirements according to the provisions of Article 62. Where no such declaration is made
within the said time-period, the system for granting patent without (substantive) examination
shall be deemed to have been retained.
SECTION THREE
System for Granting Patent Without (Substantive) Examination
Granting a Patent Without (Substantive) Examination
Article 60 :
Third parties may submit to the Institute their observations on the contents of the Search
Report within six months from the date of publication of same in the form prescribed in the
Regulation by enclosing thereto the relevant documents.
Upon the expiry to the period allowing third parties to submit their observations on the search
report, the Institute shall notify the applicant the written observations on the search report
together with the documents in evidence thereof submitted by third parties..
The applicant may, within three months from the date of notification of the observations made
by third parties according to paragraph two of this present Article, make the observations on
the search report he deems relevant for opposing the observations of third parties on the search
report and may, if he deems it necessary, amend the claim(s).
The Institute decides to grant the patent without (substantive) examination following the
expiry of the time-period wherein the applicant may submit his observations against the Stateof-the-Art
Search Report established in accordance with Article 57, without taking into
consideration the State-of-the-Art Search Report or, if any, the observations of third parties on
the Search Report.
Upon the payment of the necessary fees in compliance with the decision reached, the Institute,
shall issue the patent for a term of seven years and shall publish the issuance of same in the
related Bulletin.
The documents pertaining to the patent, the State-of-the-Art Search Report and the
observations submitted by third parties on said report shall be open to public inspection. Any
amendment(s) in the claim(s) shall also be open to public inspection by indicating the date(s)
of such amendment(s).
23
The state does not guarantee the very existence/reality and the usefulness/utility of the subject
matter of a patent granted without (substantive) examination. Submitting to substantive
examination the patent granted without (substantive) examination necessitates the filing of a
request to this effect. This request shall be filed, by the patentee or by third parties, within
seven years, at the latest, from the date of filing of the application. The (substantive)
examination fee shall be paid by the party having filed the request for substantive examination.
When the request for substantive examination is not filed within seven years, at the latest, from
the date of filing, the patent (right) shall expire. After the expiry of the period of seven years,
no request for substantive examination may be filed.
The provisions of Article 62 pertaining to granting of patent with (substantive) examination
shall apply where a request for substantive examination is filed within seven years, at the
latest, from the date of filing of the application. In order to enable third parties to raise
objections as of the patentability requirements, in accordance with the provisions of Article 62,
paragraph two, the request for substantive examination filed in respect of a patent granted
without (substantive) examination shall be published in the related Bulletin.
Publication and Printing of a Patent Granted Without (Substantive) Examination
Article 61 :
The issuance of a patent shall be published in the related Bulletin. The publication shall
include the following particulars:
a. The patent number;
b. The classification code(s) of the invention;
c. The title describing the subject matter of the invention;
d. The name, nationality and domicile of the (applicant) patentee;
e. The abstract;
f. The number and date of issue or issues of the Bulletin in which the application for patent and
the amendment(s) pertaining to the application was/were published;
g. The date of issue of the patent;
h. The statement announcing the possibility of inspecting the documentation concerning the
granted patent, the relevant search report and the observations on the search report
submitted by third parties and, if any, the observations to the contrary of the applicant;
i. The statement announcing the grant of the patent without (substantive) examination;
Each patent is printed by the Institute in the form of a fascicule and distributed to those asking
for it. In case of need, the printing may be realized by way of reproduction.
In addition to the particulars mentioned under paragraph one of this present article, each
fascicule shall contain the description, the claim(s) and, if any, the drawing(s) in their entirety
and the full text of the State-of-the-Art Search Report and the issue number of the Bulletin in
which the decision to grant the patent without (substantive) examination was published.
SECTION FOUR
System for Granting Patent With (Substantive) Examination
Granting a Patent with (Substantive) Examination
24
Article 62 :
The provisions of Articles 42 to 58 pertaining to the (filing of the) application for patent and
requirements therefor and the (formal) examination of the application, shall also apply to the
system for granting patent with (substantive) examination.
Within six months following the publication of the State-of-the-Art Search Report, third
parties may, in the form set forth in the Regulation, file objections to the grant of the patent by
putting forward the non compliance with the patentability requirements, including the lack of
novelty or the inventive activity/step or the inadequacy of the description. Documentary
evidence, in support thereof, shall be enclosed to the objections (to be) made in written form.
Within six months following the publication of the State-of-the-Art Search Report, with a view
to obtaining a patent with substantive examination, the applicant shall request the Institute to
conduct the examination; in that the subject of the invention is comprehensively described, the
invention is novel and involves inventive activity/step. For conducting such an examination,
the time-period of six months allowing third parties to raise objections shall expire and the
examination fee foreseen in the Regulation shall be paid. The examination fee may be paid, at
any time, within the time-period prescribed in the second paragraph of this present Article.
When, objections are raised by third parties, according to paragraph two of this present Article,
all such objections and their documentary evidence are instantly notified to the applicant. The
applicant may respond to the objections raised within three months following the expiry of the
time-period allowed for raising objection, and; upon his request for extention, within the timeperiod
extending such term for three additional months; and may submit his motivated
response destined to remove the objections raised, and, if he deems it necessary, may amend
the description, the drawings and the claim(s).
The Institute shall engage the examination pertaining to the patentability requirements after
the expiry of the time-period prescribed in paragraph four of this present Article. Failure of the
applicant to respond to the objections raised within the prescribed time-period is not a bar for
engaging the examination.
After examining the application, the Institute shall decide as to whether the application suffers
deficiencies or sufficiently meets the patentability requirements. The Institute shall motivate its
decision citing therein the grounds thereof. The Institute shall conduct such examination by
keeping it restricted to the contents of the claim(s).
The Institute shall notify the applicant the examination report it has established as to the
deficiency or meeting of patentability requirements of the application, by motivating same and
citing therein the grounds therefor, and shall grant the applicant six months for him to rectify
the defiency, or to amend the claim(s) and to object to it.
The applicant may submit his motivated observations destined to remove the unfavorable
opinions expressed in the examination report of the Institute and may amend, if he deems
necessary, the application.
The Institute shall examine the observations put forward by the applicant and, if any, the
amendments made in the application. Where the Institute decides that the unfavorable/differing
opinions of the examination report are to be upheld, the Institute shall notify the applicant its
25
decision in this regard by duly giving the grounds therefor and shall grant the applicant a timeperiod
of three months for submitting his opinions to the contrary.
The applicant may, at this stage of the examination, submit his observations with a view to
removing the unfavorable opinions and may, if he deems necessary, amend the application.
The Institute shall reach its final decision after examining the applicant’s observations and, if
any, the amendments made in the application. The decision of the Institute may consist in
granting the patent for all or part of the claims.
Where, as the result of the examination, the Institute determines that the application fulfills the
patentability requirements and that no objections have been raised, the Institute shall decide to
grant the patent and shall notify this decision to the applicant.
Upon the payment of the necessary fees in compliance with the decision reached, the Institute
shall issue the patent applied for.
Under the system for granting patent with (substantive) examination, the State does not
guarantee the very existence/reality and the usefulness/utility of the subject matter of the
granted patent.
Publication and printing of a Patent Granted with (Substantive) Examination
Article 63 :
The issuance of a patent shall be published in the related Bulletin. This publication shall
include the following particulars:
a. The patent number;
b. The classification code(s) of the invention;
c. The title describing the subject matter of the invention;
d. The name, nationality and domicile of the patentee;
e. The abstract;
f. The number and date of issue or issues of the Bulletin in which the application for patent
and the amendment(s) pertaining to the application was/were published;
g. The date of issue of the patent;
h. The statement announcing the possibility of inspecting the documentation concerning the
granted patent, the relevant search report and the decision of the Institute having conducted
the substantive examination showing the results reached in terms of novelty, inventive
activity/step and adequacy of the description and the objections raised in the course of the
examination.
i. The statement announcing the grant of the patent subsequent to substantive examination
conducted as to the novelty and as to the inventive activity/step;
Each patent is printed by the Institute in the form of a fascicule and distributed to those asking
for it. In case of need, the printing may be realized by way of reproduction
In addition to the particulars mentioned under paragraph one of this present article, each
fascicule shall contain the description, the claim(s) and drawing(s) in their entirety and the
full text of the State-of-the-Art Search Report and the number of the issue of the Bulletin in
which the decision to grant the patent was published.
26
SECTION FIVE
Formal Procedure as to the Application for Patent
Amendment of Claims
Article 64 :
Except for the rectification of obvious errors such as spelling errors, providing of
incorrect/inappropriate documents, the claim(s) may be amended only during the prosecution
of the granting procedure and, only, where this present Decree-Law specifically permits such
amendment.
The applicant may amend the claim(s) in accordance with the preceding paragraph without
having to obtain the consent of those persons whose rights in the application are entered in the
Patent Register.
The scope of the application may not be widened through the amendments in the claim(s).
Converting an Application for Patent into an Application for Utility Model
Article 65 :
The applicant may request that the subject matter of the application be protected by grant of
utility model certificate provided he complies with the conditions set forth in the following
subparagraphs:
a/ Where grant of a patent without (substantive) examination is of question, such request may
be filed until the expiry of the time-period allowed for submitting a response to the search
report according to the first paragraph of Article 60.
b/ Where grant of a patent with (substantive) examination is of question, such request may be
filed until the expiry of the time-period set forth in Article 62, paragraph four for filing
observations and objections in response against the substantive examination conducted by
the Institute.
The protection of the subject matter of the application for patent by grant of utility model
certificate, following the request for conversion, will take effect as from the date of filing of
the first application for patent with the benefit of the same priority, if any such priority has
been claimed under the first application for patent.
Following the (formal) examination conducted in accordance with the provisions of Article
54, the Institute may propose the applicant to convert the application with a view to issue a
utility model certificate. The applicant is free to accept or reject such proposal. Where, upon
the proposal of the Institute to convert the application, the applicant does not specifically
request such conversion, the proposal shall be deemed to have been rejected. In such case, the
procedure shall continue for the grant of a patent to the subject matter of the application.
Where the applicant files a conversion request for obtaining a utility model certificate in lieu of
a patent, the Institute shall notify the applicant that the application will be further prosecuted as
27
an application for Utility Model Certificate and shall inform him of the documents needed to
be submitted to this effect within the time-period set forth in the Regulation.
Where the applicant fails to submit the requested documents within the time-period set forth,
the request for conversion shall be deemed not to have been made and the application will be
further prosecuted as an application for patent.
The decision of the Institute accepting the conversion of the application reached subsequently
to the publication of the application for patent shall be published in the related Bulletin.
Withdrawal of an Application
Article 66 :
An application for patent may be withdrawn, by the applicant, at any time before the patent is
granted.
Where third parties have rights entered in the Patent Register, in an application for patent, the
application can not be withdrawn without the consent of the holders of such rights.
Inspection Requirements of Files of Applications for Patent
Article 67 :
The files of applications for patent not yet published can not be inspected by third parties
without the written consent of the applicant.
Third parties who can prove that the applicant intends to enforce against them the rights
originating from his application for patent, may inspect the file of the application for patent,
not yet published, without the consent of the applicant.
Where a divisional application filed according to Article 45, an application filed anew
according to Article 12 or an application converted according to Article 65 is published, the
file of the original application may be inspected by third parties before its publication and
without the applicant’s consent.
Subsequently to the publication of an application for patent, the file concerning the application
or the patent may be inspected subject to the limitations set forth in the Regulations.
The files concerning applications for patent that have been refused or withdrawn before
publication shall not be inspected by third parties.
Filing anew a Withdrawn Application
Article 68 :
Where an application for patent published in accordance with the provisions of Article 55 is
withdrawn, a new application for patent pertaining to the same invention may not be filed.
Where an application for patent that has not been published in accordance with the provisions
of Article 55 is withdrawn, the first applicant may file anew an application for patent
28
pertaining to the same invention. However, the protection will run as from the last date of
filing the of the application.
Obligation to Mark/Indicate the Number of an Application for Patent or of a Patent
Article 69 :
The person who wishes to enforce against third parties his rights originating from an
application for patent or from a patent, is under the obligation to communicate to third parties
in question, the number of the concerned application for patent or of the concerned patent.
In case where declarations appearing on a product, its labels or packagings or on promotional
material or advertisements or printed matter under any form, give the impression that
protection originating from an application for patent or a granted patent exists, the person
making such declaration is under the obligation to indicate therein the number of the
application for patent or the number of the patent.
29
SECTION SIX
Objections to Formal Deficiencies During Patent Granting
Procedure Raised Subsequent to the Issuance of Patent
Objections to Formal Deficiencies
Article 70 :
To the exception of the provision of Article 45 pertaining to the unity of the invention, third
parties shall be entitled to raise objections against the grant of a patent on grounds of formal
deficiencies to comply with the procedural requirements provided under Articles 42 to 63. In
order to raise such objection, third parties need not to have previously filed observations
against the State-of-the-Art Search Report or have raised objections under the system for
granting patent with (substantive) examination.
The lack of novelty or of inventive activity/step of the patent granted without (substantive)
examination shall not constitute the subject of such objection.
Effect of the Objection to Formal Deficiencies
Article 71 :
To the exception of the matter of the Unity of the invention, where the Institute has failed,
during the examination, to perform one of the actions to be formally effected according to the
patent granting procedure or where the Institute has omitted to perform an essential formal
procedural action, the decision of the Institute to rectify such deficiency in consideration of the
objection raised shall have the effect to annule the administrative actions pertaining to the
grant of the patent retrospectively to the stage of the procedure where the concerned deficiency
occurred and to reengage the procedure from that stage onwards so as to perform anew all such
actions.
PART FIVE
Provisions Pertaining to Rights Conferred by a Patent
Term of a Patent
Article 72 :
The term of a patent granted with (substantive) examination shall be a non-extendible period of
20 years from the date of filing the application.
The term of a patent granted without (substantive) examination shall be seven years. Where the
(substantive) examination request is made within the period of seven years and the patent is
granted after such (substantive) examination is conducted, the term of the patent shall be
completed to 20 years as of the date of filing the application.
Scope of Right Conferred By a Patent
Article 73 :
The holder of a patent shall benefit from the right it confers without differentiating between the
place of the invention, its field of technology and whether the concerned products are imported
or of domestic production.
30
The holder of a patent is entitled to prevent following actions by third parties performed
without permission:
a/ Production, sale, use, or importation of patented products or keeping them in possession for
purposes other than for personal needs;
b/ Use of a process that is the subject matter of the patent;
c/ Offers made by third persons to others for the use of a patented process of which the use is
known or should be known to be prohibited;
d/ Putting to sale or making use or importing or keeping in possession for any such purpose
other than for personal needs of products directly obtained through the patented process.
Article 73/A pertaining to “Penalties and Fines” added to the Decree-Law No. 551 with the
enactment of Law No. 4128 as from November 7, 1995.
Article 73/A
(a) Those making false declaration with respect to the declaration prescribed in Article
44; or those removing, without authority the sign indicating a patent right rightfully
placed on a product or on its packaging; or those falsely presenting themselves as the
right holder of an application for patent or of a patent shall be sentenced to an
imprisonment term of between one and two years and to pay a fine of between three
hundred million liras and six hundred million liras,
(b) Having committed the acts unrightfully and without authority or who should have
known that they have no right to perform such actions, those transferring or placing
as security or performing any other such action for utilising any one of the rights of
transfer, placing of security, execution of levy and other such rights as provisioned
under Article 86 and transferring to some other person the license pertaining to such
right, and those affixing signs on a product or on its packaging, produced or put to
sale by own self or by others, or on commercial documents or on advertising
material in such a way that would convey the impression as if a relationship exists
with patent under protection, or of using to the same effect writings, signs or
expressions in the newspapers, advertisements and commercials without being the
right holder of the invention under patent protection or after the expiry of the term
of protection of patent or after the invalidation or after the termination of the patent
on grounds specified under Articles 129 or 133 shall be sentenced to an
imprisonment term of between two and three years and to pay a fine of between six
hundred million and one billion liras,
(c) Those who have committed any one of the felonies specified under Article 136 shall be
sentenced to an imprisonment term of between two and four years and to pay a fine
of between six hundred million and one billion liras, furthermore, judgment shall be
ruled to close down the premises of their undertaking for a period not to be less than
one year and to prevent them from practicing any commercial activity during the
same period.
Where the felonies stated hereabove; are committed by those working in the
undertaking, whether on their own initiative or under instructions, while carrying out
their duties, the employees and the owner or the manager or their representative and the
person who effectively manages the undertaking, under whatever title and authority, and
who have not prevented the misdemeanor shall be punished in the same manner. Where
the felonies specified under Article 136 have been committed during the execution of
31
tasks related with a legal person, the legal person shall be jointly liable for the expenses
and for the
32
pecuniary fine. For accomplices, depending on the nature of the act, the provisions of
Articles 64, 65, 66 and 67 of the Turkish Penal Code shall apply. Prosecution with respect
to the felonies stated hereabove shall be subject to complaint.
Subparagraph 8 of paragraph one of Article 344 of the Code of Criminal Procedures No.
1412 shall not apply for the implementation of the provisions of this present Article. The
right of complaint belongs to the person whose patent right has been infringed, and
additionally belongs also to the Institute for all felonies, to the exception of those
provisioned under Article 136, and to the Consumer Associations and to the
establishments under the jurisdiction of Laws No. 5590 or No. 507 for falsely making the
declaration, provisioned in Article 44, with respect to true identity of the patent right
holder, and for affixing signs on a product or on its packaging produced and put to sale,
by own self or by others, or on commercial documents or on promotional material in
such a way that would convey the impression as if a relationship exists with a patent
under protection, or of using to the same effect writings, signs or expressions in the
advertisements and commercials, at the published and visual media, without being the
right holder of the patent or after the expiry of the term of protection of the patent or
after the invalidation or after the termination of the patent.
The complaint (with respect to such felonious acts) shall be made within two years as
from the date when the act and the actor become known. The complaints with respect to
acts falling within this scope shall be treated as of urgent matters. The provisions of
Article 36 of the Turkish Penal Code and the related articles of the Code of Criminal
Procedures shall apply for the seizure, or the confiscation or the destruction of the goods
and the means/equipment and machinery used to produce these goods which are subjects
of acts of felony having infringed the rights conferred by an application for patent or a
patent within the provisions of this present Decree-Law.
Use of Patent Elements by Third Parties
Article 74 :
The right holder of a patent is entitled to prevent third parties, from handing over to persons
unauthorized to work the patented invention, elements and means related to an essential part of
the invention, subject matter of the patent, and rendering possible the implementation of the
patented invention. In order that this provision may apply, the concerned third parties have to
know, that such elements and means are sufficient for putting the invention to use and that they
know, that they will be used to such effect or that the circumstances render such situation
sufficiently evident.
The provisions under Paragraph one of this present Article shall not apply, when the elements
or means referred to in Paragraph one of this present Article are products commonly to be
found on the market, unless third parties incite the persons concerned to commit such
(prohibited) acts.
Persons committing the acts specified in subparagraphs (a), (b) and (c) of Article 75 shall not
be deemed to be persons not authorized to make use of a patent within the meaning of
Paragraph one of this present Article.
33
Limits of the Scope of Rights Conferred by a Patent
Article 75 :
The following acts shall remain outside the scope of rights conferred by a patent :
a/ Acts devoid of any industrial or commercial purpose and limited to private ends/aims;
b/ Acts involving, for experimental purposes, the invention, subject matter of a patent;
c/ Extemporaneous preparations of medicines in pharmacies involving no mass production and
carried out solely in making up a prescription and acts related to the medicines thus
prepared;
d/ Use of patented invention in the manufacture or operation of ships or spaceships or airplanes
or land transportation vehicles of countries signatory of the Paris Convention or for
satisfying the needs of these, provided that said vehicles happen to be, temporarily or
accidentally, within the boundaries of the Republic of Turkey;
e/ Where acts provided under Article 27 of the International Convention for Civil Aviation
dated December 7, 1944 are related to an aircraft of a State, the provisions of this present
Article shall apply likewise to said aircrafts.
Exhaustion of Rights Conferred by a Patent
Article 76 :
Rights conferred by a patent shall not extend to acts committed with regard to a product under
patent protection after said product has been put to sale in Turkey by the right holder of the
patent or with his consent.
Rights Conferred by Prior Use
Article 77 :
The right holder of a patent shall not have the right to prevent person or persons who, in good
faith, between the date of filing of the application and the date of priority, had worked the
invention in Turkey or had made serious and effective preparations to work the said invention;
from continuing to work the subject matter of the patent, in the same manner as before, or from
commencing its working as of the preparations made to this effect. However, third persons
may continue working the subject matter of the patent, in the same manner as before, or
commence its working as of the preparations made to this effect, only to the extent necessary
for meeting the reasonable needs of their enterprise. Such right to work the invention shall only
be transferable with the enterprise.
The rights conferred by a patent within the meaning of Article 76 shall not extend to acts
related to products put to sale by persons indicated in Paragraph one of this present Article.
Effects of Patents of Prior Date
Article 78 :
The holder of a patent may not invoke same in his defense in actions instituted against him for
infringement of other patents that have an earlier date of priority.
Dependency of subject matters of Patents
Article 79 :
34
The fact that a patented invention can not be worked without using an invention, protected
under a prior patent shall not be an obstacle to its validity. In such cases, neither the right
holder of the prior patent, nor the right holder of the latter patent may use, the patent of the
other party, without his consent, during the term of validity of his patent. However, the right
holder of the latter patent may use, also, the prior patent where he has been authorized by the
right holder of the prior patent to use same or has been granted compulsory license to use said
prior patent.
Restrictions on the Use of a Patent
Article 80 :
A patented invention shall not be put into use, in any way, contrary to the Laws, or morality, or
public order or public health, and its working shall be subject to the prohibitions and
restrictions, whether temporary or permanent, established or to be established by Law.
Legal Monopoly
Article 81 :
Where a patent is granted for an invention that comes under a legal monopoly, the monopolist
may only use the invention with the consent of the patent holder. The monopolist is under the
obligation to put to use those inventions that involve notable technical progress in the field of
industry he is engaged in by obtaining their right of use.
The monopolist shall have the right to request that he be authorized to work the patented
invention. Where the monopolist makes such a request the patent holder may ask him to take
over the patent. The amount to be paid by the monopolist for the right to work the patented
invention or for acquiring of the patent shall be determined by agreement between the parties.
In case no agreement is reached in this regard, the said amount shall be determined by the
court.
Without prejudice to the provisions of Paragraph two of this present Article, where a
monopoly has been established after a patent has been granted, the patent holder shall also
have the right to ask the monopolist to acquire the enterprise or the equipment/installation with
which the patented invention is worked, upon payment of an amount to be determined by the
parties. In case, the parties can not reach an agreement on the amount of the compensation to
be paid, such amount shall be determined by the court.
Patented inventions that cannot be put to use because of the existence of a legal monopoly
shall not be subject to the payment of yearly annuity.
Effects of Publication of an Application for Patent
Article 82 :
The protection accorded to the right holders of patents granted under the provisions of this
present Decree-Law shall be accorded likewise to the applicant of an application for patent as
from the date of publication of the application for patent in the relevant bulletin and for as long
as said application remains in the effect.
Where the person making use, without the permission of an applicant for patent, of the
invention that is the subject matter of the application for patent, is informed of the (existance
35
of) application for patent or of the scope of said application for patent, the protection,
hereabove mentioned, shall be valid, likewise, for the period preceding the date of publication
of the application for patent.
Where the subject matter of an application for patent refers to a process related to
microorganism(s), the protection, hereabove mentioned, shall only commence when the
microorganism has been made accessible to those interested.
An application for patent shall produce none of the effects provided for under Paragraphs one
to three of this present Article when said application is or is deemed to have been withdrawn or
when same has been rejected as a result of a final decision.
Scope of Protection Conferred by an Application for Patent or a Patent and the
Interpretation of Claim(s)
Article 83 :
The scope of protection conferred by an application for patent or a patent shall be determined
according to the claim(s). Claims shall be interpreted in consideration of the description and
drawings.
Claims shall be interpreted in such a manner so as to permit, on the one hand, a fair protection
for the right holder of an application for patent or of a patent, while, on the other hand,
providing a reasonable degree of certainty to third parties on the scope of protection.
Where an application for patent has been filed for pharmaceutical or veterinary products/drugs
and for chemicals destined to agriculture, the authorities issuing authorizations/licenses for the
manufacture and sale of such products and requesting for this purpose information and test
results, that were not disclosed to the public and the realization and accumulation of which
requires considerable expenses and efforts, shall keep such information and test results
secret/confidential. The authority asking for such information and test results shall take the
necessary measures to prevent unjustified/unlegitimate use thereof.
Claims shall not be interpreted as being confined to their strict literal wording. However, for
determining the scope of protection of the subject application for patent or of the patent, where
those characteristics, though contemplated by the inventor, are not expressed in the claim(s)
and where such characteristics can be only revealed from an interpretation of the description
and drawings by a person skilled in that technical field, the claim(s) shall not be deemed to
include/cover such characteristics.
At the time of an alleged infringement, in determining the scope of protection conferred by an
application for patent or a patent, all elements being equivalent to the elements as expressed in
the claim(s) shall be also considered.
Where, at the time when an alleged infringement is put forward, the equivalent element
performs substantially the same function and performs such function in a substantially similar
manner and gives the same result as the element as expressed in the claim(s), such element
shall be, generally, deemed to be equivalent to the element as expressed in the claim(s).
36
In determining the extent of protection, due account shall be taken of any statement made by
the applicant during the patent granting procedure or by the holder of the patent during the
term of validity of the patent.
Where a patent contains examples of the embodiment of the invention or examples of the
functions or results of the invention, the claims shall not be interpreted as being limited to
those examples. In particular, the fact that a product or process includes additional features, not
found in the examples, disclosed in the patent, lacks features expressed in such examples or
does not achieve every objective or does not possess every characteristic expressed in such
examples shall not remove the product or process from the extent of protection conferred by
the claims.
Rights Pertaining to Process Patents
Article 84 :
Where a product, for which there is a patent in respect of its manufacturing process, is
imported into Turkey, the patentee shall, in respect of the imported products benefit from the
same rights as those recognized to him under this present Decree-Law for the
obtention/manufacture of said product in Turkey.
Where a patent concerns a process for the manufacture of new products or substances, unless
proof to the contrary, any product or substance having the same properties shall be deemed to
have been obtained by using the patented process. The burden of proof lies with the persons
claiming the contrary.
In case of legal proceedings regarding such a claim to the contrary as provided under
paragraph two of this present Article, the legitimate interests of the defendant, in keeping
undisclosed his manufacturing and business/trade secrets, shall be taken into consideration.
PART SIX
Legal Transactions upon an Application for Patent or a Patent
SECTION ONE
Relation of Joint Ownership
Article 85 :
Where an application for patent or a patent is owned, undividedly, by more than one person,
the resultant joint ownership shall be governed by agreement among the parties or, in the
absence, of such agreement, by the provisions of the Civil Code pertaining to joint ownership.
Independently from the others, anyone of the joint owners, may accomplish the following
actions, in his own name :
a/ dispose, freely, of the part belonging to him. In case the part is transferred to a third party,
the Institute shall notify the other joint-owners, within two months, in order to enable them
to exercise their right of preemption. The right of preemption shall be exercised within one
month as from the date of notification of the Institute.
37
b/ work the invention following the notification to the other joint owners;
c/ take necessary steps to protect the application for patent or the patent;
d/ institute civil or criminal action against third parties who violate, in any way, the rights
conferred by the jointly filed application for patent or the jointly owned patent. The party
initiating such legal proceedings shall notify the other right holders of the action taken
within one month as from the date of institution of same, to enable them to join the action.
A licence, to a third party, to work the invention shall be granted upon decision made by all
right holders jointly. However, for reasons of equity, in consideration of particular
38
circumstances, the court may decide that one of the parties alone should be authorized to grant
such licence.
SECTION TWO
Establishment of Right on an Application for Patent and on a Patent
Article 86 :
An application for patent or a patent may be transferred to some other party, may be inherited
or the right to use same may be subject to license. An application for patent or a patent may be
pledged. The provisions of the Civil Code, related to pledging, shall apply.
Transaction between living persons on an application for patent or a patent shall be in writing.
Indivisibility
Article 87 :
For the purpose of transfer or of establishing a right thereon, an application for patent or a
patent shall be indivisible; even when joint ownership, on them, by several persons is of
question.
Contractual License
Article 88 :
The right to work/use an application for patent or a patent may be the subject of a license
agreement to have effect within the entirety of the national boundaries or in a part thereof.
Licenses may be exclusive or non-exclusive.
The rights conferred by a patent or an application for patent may be exercised through a court
action instituted by the patent right holder against the licensee who violates the terms of the
license agreement, prescribed in paragraph one of this present Article.
Unless the agreement includes a provision to the contrary, the licence is non-exclusive. The
licensor may grant other licenses for the same invention to third persons and may work the
patented invention himself.
Exclusive licenses shall prevent granting of licenses to others and the licensor may put the
patented invention to use only when he has specifically reserved such right (in the agreement).
Unless the agreement includes a provision to the contrary, holders of contractual licenses may
not transfer their rights conferred by a license to other parties nor grant sub-licenses.
Unless the agreement includes a provision to the contrary, holders of contractual licenses shall
have the right to perform all acts/actions for putting to use the patented invention within the
entirety of the national boundaries, for the whole term of the patent.
39
Obligation to Provide Information
Article 89 :
Unless the agreement includes a provision to the contrary, the assignor or the licensor of an
application for patent or a patent is under the obligation to provide to the assignee or licensee
the technical data/information that is necessary to work the invention satisfactorily.
The assignee or the licensee to whom confidential data/information has been given shall be
obliged to take the necessary measures to prevent their disclosure.
Obligation Arising from transfer of a Right and Grant of a Licence
Article 90 :
A person, who, having transferred rights conferred by an application for patent or a patent or
having granted a license, either against a consideration or without, is subsequently understood
to have no authority to perform such actions, shall be liable for the situation resulting
therefrom against the persons involved.
Where an application for patent is withdrawn or refused or a court rules to invalidate a patent,
the provisions of Article 131 of this present Decree-Law shall apply, unless the parties provide
by agreement, for increased liability of the transferor or licensor.
The transferor or licensor shall be liable, at any time, for their acts effected in bad faith. Bad
faith shall be deemed to exist where the other party has not been informed of the existance of
reports or decisions in the Turkish or foreign languages available or known to the transferor or
licensor concerning the patentability of the invention that is the subject matter of the
application for patent or of the patent; (to be) transferred or licensed; or where the documents
including declarations on such reports or decisions have not been specifically mentioned in the
contract.
The time-period within which a compensation may be claimed according to the provisions of
this present Article shall run as from the date when the court decision upon which it is based
becomes res judicata. The provisions of the Law of Obligations on prescription of time-period
shall apply.
Joint Liability
Article 91 :
Where third persons suffer damage/prejudice due to a defect in the invention constituting the
subject matter of a patent or of an application for patent that was assigned or for which a
license was granted, the assignor and the assignee, the licensor and the licensee shall be jointly
responsible.
Unless the agreement includes a provision to the contrary the assignor or licensor bearing the
liability as of the provision of the preceding paragraph may reflect to and claim such liability
from the assignee or licensee. Such liability may be reflected to and claimed from the assignee
or licensee when the assignor or licensor has not acted in bad faith and when, for reasons of
equity, the assignee or licensee should bear all or part of the compensation due for damages.
40
Entry in the Patent Register and Effects of same
Article 92 :
Applications for patent and patents are entered in the Patent Register in compliance with the
provisions set forth in the Regulation .
With the exception of the provision of the first paragraph of Article 13 pertaining to the
usurpation of the patent, transfers and licenses related to applications for patent or to patents or
other acts whether voluntary or compulsory affecting applications for patent or patents shall
have effect against third parties, in good faith, as from the date of their entry in the Patent
Register.
Rights conferred by an application for patent or a patent may not be invoked against third
parties unless and until they are duly entered in the Patent Register.
Rights conferred by an application for patent or a patent may not be announced/marked on the
products as being under patent protection until their entry in the Patent Register. The Institute
will see to it that the transactions entered in the Patent Register and appearing on official
documents are carried out in due conformity with the law, and are valid and effective. The
patent register shall be (open to) public.
Abuse of Competition
Article 93 :
Where a patentee commits an act in violation of the general provisions on unfair competition
while putting his patent (application) to use, the court may condemn the patentee to offer his
patent for licensing.
SECTION THREE
Offer for Licensing
Patentee’s Offer for Licensing
Article 94 :
Where the patentee makes no use of the patented invention according to the provision of
Article 96, he may announce by applying in writing to Institute, his willingness to authorize
the use of the invention under license to any party, interested to put the invention to use.
Where a legal action has resulted in the change of ownership of a patent, with the entry in the
Patent Register of the new patent holder, in accordance with the provisions of Article 12 of this
Decree-Law, the offer for licensing, made previously, shall be deemed to have been
withdrawn.
The Institute shall enter in the Patent Register and shall publish the offer for licensing. The
offers for licensing are open to public inspection. The Institute shall take appropriate measures
to permit such inspection.
The patentee may withdraw, at any time, his offer for licensing provided no person has
41
demanded the patentee for the grant of a license (to use the invention). Withdrawal of the offer
shall take effect from the date of filing before the Institute of the petition for the withdrawal of
same.
Where the license has been entered in the Patent Register as an exclusive license, the patentee
can not additionally offer licenses to others.
Any person entitled to use the invention as licensee, upon the offer for licensing, shall be
considered non-exclusive licensee and the license granted in accordance with the provisions of
this present Article shall be deemed to be a contractual license.
When an offer for licensing has been made, no application to enter an exclusive license in the
Patent Register shall be permitted unless the offer for licensing has been withdrawn or is
acknowledged to have been withdrawn.
Acceptance of the Offer for Licensing
Article 95 :
Any person who wishes to obtain a license by taking up the offer for licensing, shall inform the
Institute of his intention in writing, in triplicate, also indicating therein the manner by which
(s)he is to make use of the invention. The Institute shall send a copy of it to the patentee, while
a second copy is to be returned to the applicant. Both copies shall bear the seal of the Institute
and the same date of dispatch.
In case, the parties fail to reach agreement on the license fee, upon request by either party, the
competent court shall, after hearing both parties, determine the license fee.
The court may modify the (license) fee when the amount on which the parties had agreed has
become inappropriate. Request for modification of license fee may be made only after a period
of one year, at least, has elapsed subsequent to the determination of the license fee by the
court.
At the expiration of each quarter of the calendar year, the licensee is under obligation to inform
the patentee of the use he has made of the invention and to pay the license fee. Where, the
licensee does not fulfill those obligations, the licensor may request the licensee to carry out his
obligations within the month. Should the court establish that the licensee has failed to fulfill
his obligations within this period, the license shall be annulled.
SECTION FOUR
Obligation To Work/Use
Obligation to Work/Use
Article 96 :
The patentee or the person authorized by him is under obligation to put to use/work, the
invention under patent protection. The obligation to put to use/work must be realized within
three years as from the date of publication in the relevant bulletin of the announcement related
to the issue of the patent.
Market conditions are (to be) taken into consideration when/for assessing use/working.
42
Evidence of Use
Article 97 :
The patentee or the person authorized by him shall prove his use of the invention by an official
certificate to be filed before the Institute. The official certificate attesting the use of the patent
shall be established according to the general criteria and rules foreseen in the Regulation by the
authority designated therein.
The certificate (of use) is issued at the conclusion of the inspection of the production in the
industrial premises where the invention is being put to use/worked. The certificate (of use)
shall confirm the fact that the patented invention is being implemented or that the (goods)
object of the invention is offered for sale.
The certificate (of use) must be prepared within three months as from the date of filing the
relative application before the concerned authority. The certificate shall cover the data relative
to the actual/effective use of the patented invention.
The certificate of use is entered in the Patent Register.
Acceptance of Use
Article 98 :
When working of the patented invention is attested (before the Turkish Patent Institute) by
documentary evidence, the patented invention shall be deemed to have been put to use in
compliance of Article 97, unless proof to the contrary is brought through court action.
PART SEVEN
Compulsory License
SECTION ONE
General Requirements for Compulsory License
Requirements for granting Compulsory Licensee
Article 99 :
Compulsory license is (to be) granted where no offer for licensing offer has been made and
where any one of the following situations/conditions materializes:
1. Failure to put to use/work the patented invention in accordance with Article 96;
2. Dependency of subject matter of patents as mentioned in Article 79.
3. On grounds of public interest as mentioned in Article 103.
Request for Compulsory License
Article 100 :
Any interested person may after the expiration of the period foreseen in Article 96, request the
granting of a compulsory license on the grounds that the patent, at the time of the request, was
43
not put to use or that the delay in the use thereof was not due to justifiable/legitimate reasons
or that the use thereof had been suspended during an uninterrupted period of 3 years without
justifiable/legitimate reason.
Technical or economic or legal reasons of an objective nature shall be deemed to constitute
legitimate excuses for the inability to put the patent to use. The reasons accepted to be in the
nature to constitute obstacles for using/working the patented invention are those which are
beyond the control and will of the patentee.
Compulsory license in case of dependency between Patents
Article 101 :
Where the patented invention can not be put to use without infringing the rights conferred by a
prior patent, the latter patentee, by bringing evidence that his patent, with reference to the prior
patent will serve a different industrial purpose or achieves significant technical improvement,
may request the court to grant license for using the patent of prior date.
Where patented inventions, dependent in the sense of Article 79, serve the same industrial
purpose and where a compulsory license has been granted in favour of one of the dependent
patents, the patentee of the dependent patent upon which compulsory license is granted may
request from the court that a compulsory license be granted in his favour on the other
dependent patent.
Where the subject matter of a patent concerns a process aiming to obtain a patented chemical
product or substance related to pharmacology, and where said process patent achieves a
significant technical improvement, with respect to the patent of prior date both the patentee of
the process patent and the patentee of the product patent may request from the court the grant
of compulsory license for using the patented invention of the other party.
The scope of compulsory license granted for reasons of dependency between patents in the
sense of Article 79, permits use of the concerned patented invention. In case when one of the
dependent patents is invalidated or expires, the decision on compulsory license shall remain
without effect.
Exportation as ground for Compulsory license
Article 102 :
The exportation (situation/possibility) of the patented invention shall not be accepted to
constitute a ground for compulsory license.
Compulsory license on grounds of Public Interest
Article 103 :
The Council of Ministers may decide that the invention subject matter a patent or an
application for patent be put to use on grounds of public interest by means of compulsory
license where putting the invention to use, increasing its or, generally spreading, its usage or
improving same for a useful end are of great importance for public health or national defense
purposes, public interest shall be deemed to be involved.
Situations where the non use of the invention or its insufficient use in terms of quality and
quantity, causes serious damage to the country’s economic or technical development shall be
deemed to also involve public interest.
44
The concerned Ministry proposes to the Council of Ministers to issue a decree pertaining to the
grant of compulsory license. In case, where the use of the invention is important for national
defense or public health, the proposal is prepared jointly by the concerned ministry, and the
Ministry of National Defense or the Ministry of Health.
The decision to grant compulsory license, may, restrict the use of the invention to one or some
enterprises on grounds of its importance for national defense.
In case when the patentee can realize to put the invention to use for public interest without
having the need to generalize/spread the use thereof or to grant the use thereof to a person
other than the patentee, the patented invention may be, conditionally, subjected to compulsory
license. In such a situation, on the basis of the Decree of the Council of Ministers, the Court
shall decide that the patentee shall put the invention to use for a period it will set, not longer
than one year, in such a manner to sufficiently satisfy public interest, to develop/spread and
enhance the actual use made of it.
The court shall decide on the period it will deem appropriate or subject the patented invention
to compulsory license after taking into consideration the viewpoint of the patentee. The court
shall decide, whether use has been made of, in the public interest, or not, after the expiry of the
period prescribed. Where the court rules that use had not been made of in the public interest, it
shall subject the patented invention to compulsory license.
Request for Mediation
Article 104 :
A person desirous to apply for a compulsory license may in the first instance resort to the
Institute asking for its mediation with a view to obtaining a contractual license for the same
patent.
For applying to the Institute for mediation the following particulars shall be indicated in the
application and the fee set forth in the regulation shall be paid :
a/ Information about the applicant;
b/ Information on the patent, subject for mediation and the patentee;
c/ Conditions justifying the grant of compulsory license;
d/ Scope of the license requested; reasons for such a request;
e/ Information sufficient enough for deciding whether the applicant is capable to effectively
and efficiently make use of the invention and whether he can supply a reasonable guarantee
required by the patentee for granting the license.
The following documents shall, furthermore, be attached to the request for the mediation of the
Institute:
1. Documents constituting the grounds for the request;
2. Document attesting to guarantee that the applicant will pay the transaction costs in the
amount set forth in the Regulation;
3. A Copies each of the application and of the documents attached to it.
45
Mediation by the Institute
Article 105 :
The Institute shall decide on the request for mediation within one month as from the date of
application.
The Institute shall accept to mediate when from the application for mediation and the
documents attached to it, and after due investigation, it is convinced that there is in fact a
situation requiring the grant of compulsory license, that the applicant is solvent and that has all
the necessary means for putting the invention to use.
The Institute shall notify its decision about the mediation to the applicant and also to the
patentee with a copy of the application for mediation.
Institute’s procedure of mediation
Article 106 :
When the Institute agrees to comply with the mediation request, it shall make a call without
delay for the participation of the parties in the contractual license negotiations in which it will
act as mediator. The negotiations shall not last longer than two months.
Where, within despite the two months term, following the notification to the parties of the
acceptance of the mediation request, it has not been possible to conclude a contractual license,
the Institute shall declare that its mediation and examination activities have come to an end and
notify the interested parties thereof.
If the Institute is convinced that that the license agreement can indeed be concluded, it may
accept the request for an extension of term to be filed jointly by the parties, even though the
two months term may have expired.
Prior to the final decision to be reached by the Institute, only the parties are entitled to have
access to the documents related to the procedure of mediation and ask for copies thereof
against a fee. The parties and the staff of the Institute shall observe the secrecy of the contents
of the documents.
Effects of the Institute’s Mediation Activities
Article 107 :
Where the negotiations in which the Institute has acted as mediator result in that the parties
conclude an agreement on the license to use the invention, subject matter of the patent, the
licensee is given a term to start putting the invention to use.
The term given (to the licensee) for starting to put the invention to use shall not exceed one
year and the following conditions shall be required for the activity of mediation to come to an
end :
1. The license agreed upon by the parties shall be an exclusive one and shall not constitute an
obstacle for being subject to compulsory license;
46
2. Filing of documents evidencing that the person, having applied for mediation, possesses the
equipment/installation and materials necessary for putting the invention to use and that as of
its subject matter, a term is needed to start putting the invention to use;
3. Supply of a guarantee, in the amount set forth in the Regulation, to cover the liability to
arise should the applicant for mediation fail to start making use of the invention within the
term foreseen;
4. Payment of the fee set forth in the Regulation for this purpose.
Where on the basis of the documents submitted by the parties, the Institute comes to a firm
conviction that the requirements set forth in the preceding paragraph are met and that the
parties have the will to immediately take action for putting the patent to use, it will finalize the
mediation procedure and enter the license granted, as a result of the mediation, in the Patent
Register.
The applicant for mediation is under the obligation to notify the Institute of the preparations
relative for starting to put the invention to use and of the prevailing situation. The Institute is
entitled to inspect, if it deems it necessary.
The licensee having obtained the license through the mediation of the Institute may request the
court to suspend the procedure relative to the grant of compulsory license for the patent in
question within the time-period granted for putting the invention to use.
Upon bringing evidence; that the decision for suspending the procedure for the grant of
compulsory license has been reached on the basis of a considerable deceipt or, on an opinion
according to which the parties could not be in a position to carry out on a serious and
continuos basis the activity for putting the invention to use within the set term, the court may
rescind the decision of suspension.
When at the conclusion of the term, the licensee having obtained the license through the
mediation of the Institute, fails to start using the invention, the Institute may decide on the
payment of a fee by the licensee to the licensor. The fee shall be calculated according to the
license fee, the licensee has to pay the patentee in a license agreement of a term equivalent to
the term during which the invention was not used.
Request for Compulsory License
Article 108 :
Upon expiry of a term of three months, as from the expiry of the term foreseen in Article 106
or as from the date of the decision of the Institute refusing the request for mediation, or when
the parties fail to agree to conclude the license agreement within the term of the mediation
activity conducted by the Institute, the court may be asked to grant compulsory license.
The applicant for compulsory license may claim on the basis of the precedingly conducted
mediation procedure and the documents submitted to this effect that the conditions for the
grant of compulsory license are fulfilled. The applicant shall, furthermore, indicate the
equipment/installation and materials he disposes for effectively putting the invention to use
and the guarantee he will be in a position to produce in case the license is granted.
The following documents shall be enclosed to the application for compulsory license :
a. Documents substantiating convincingly the application for compulsory license, in case
documents related to the precedingly conducted mediation procedure are not available;
47
b. Documents attesting to guarantee the amount set forth in the Regulation for meeting the
costs of the compulsory license transactions;
c. Document attesting the payment of the fee set forth in the Regulation.
d. Copies each of the application and of the documents submitted.
Engaging the procedure for compulsory license
Article 109 :
Where the conditions provided under Article 108 are fulfilled, the court shall engage the
procedure pertaining to the application for compulsory license. A copy of the application and
copies of each of the attached documents shall be sent to the patentee. The patentee may raise
objections against said documents, within one month at the latest, as of the date of receipt of
same.
Where an application for compulsory license has been filed as a consequence of the Institute’s
refusal of the request for mediation, the term given to the patentee for raising objections shall
not be shorter than two months.
In the objection raised by the patentee the documents related to the mediation procedure
precedingly conducted by the Institute shall be taken into consideration and the evidences
which have been put forward with regard to said procedure, but which are not to be found
among said documents shall also be submitted. Copies of the evidences shall be sent by the
court to the applicant.
Compulsory License Decision
Article 110 :
The court shall notify the objection raised by the patentee, to the applicant for compulsory
license and shall rule within one month either to reject the application or to grant the
compulsory license. This term shall not be extended. Where the patentee has raised no
objection against the application for compulsory license, the court shall rule without any
further delay to grant the compulsory license.
The decision to grant the compulsory license shall include the following:
The scope, the fee, the term of the license, the guarantee produced by the licensee, the date
when the use is to commence and the measures for an effective and serious use of the patent.
When the court decision is appealed against, in case where the evidences put forward by the
patentee for suspending the execution of same are deemed adequate by the court, the use of the
invention shall be postponed until the decision on license is finalized. The appeal shall not
postpone the execution of the finalized decision.
Costs related to the Decision on Compulsory License
Article 111 :
The decision to grant compulsory license shall indicate the expenses payable by each of the
parties. Joint expenses shall be shared between the parties by half.
Any of the parties having acted in bad faith or having committed a fault, may be enjoined to
bear the expenses in whole.
48
Suspending the Procedure for Compulsory License
Article 112 :
Following the filing of the application for compulsory license, the court shall engage the
necessary procedure for reaching decision to grant a license. The court can suspend the
procedure for a maximum period of three months, at any time, and only for once, upon the duly
motivated request, made jointly by the patentee and the applicant.
Upon the expiry of said term, the court, shall notify the parties thereof and shall resume the
procedure.
Notification to the Patent Agent for Persons Domiciled Abroad
Article 113 :
Where the patentee is not domiciled in Turkey, the correspondence and notifications referred
to in this section shall be addressed to the Patent Agent representing him.
SECTION TWO
Compulsory License System
Legal nature of Compulsory License
Article 114 :
Compulsory license shall not be exclusive. Only, the compulsory license on grounds of public
interest according to Article 103, may be granted as an exclusive license. However, exclusivity
shall not be contradictory to the purpose of compulsory license and must be necessary for
economically valourising the invention under patent protection.
In case a compulsory license is granted, the licensee has no right in principle to import the
subject matter of the patent. However, the subject matter of the patent may be imported only
when the compulsory license has been granted to the licensee on grounds of public interest and
when the licensee has been specifically authorized to import. Such authorization to import
shall be issued but on a temporary basis and shall be limited to meeting the demand.
In case of a compulsory license the patentee shall be paid an economically reasonable fee. The
license fee shall be determined especially by taking into consideration the economic
importance of the invention.
Violation of the Relationship of (mutual) confidence
Article 115 :
Where the relationship based on mutual confidence between the patentee and the licensee is
violated by the patentee, the licensee, according to the role played by the violation in the
valourisation of the invention, may request that a reduction be accorded from the license fee
the patentee may ask for.
49
Scope of compulsory license for Patent-of-Addition
Article 116 :
Compulsory license covers the addition(s) to the existing patent, at the date of the
acceptance/grant of the license. Where after grant of compulsory license patent(s)-of-addition
to the patent have newly issued and where such patent(s)-of-addition serve the same industrial
purpose as the patent, subject of the license, the licensee may request from the court that the
patent(s)-of-addition be also included within the scope of the compulsory license.
Where despite the mediation of the Institute, the parties can not agree on the license fee and
other terms/conditions of the license whose scope has been enlarged with the patent(s)-ofaddition,
these shall be determined by court.
Transfer of Compulsory License
Article 117 :
A compulsory license may validly be transferred on the condition that it is transferred together
with the business or the premises/part of the business where it is being valourized. The
Institute shall enter the transfer in the register. Where the compulsory license is granted for
reasons of dependency between patents, the license is transferred together with the dependent
patent.
The beneficiary of compulsory license is not permitted sub-license. Any act/actions performed
to this effect shall be deemed to be invalid.
Request for modifying the terms/conditions
Article 118 :
The licensee or the patentee may request from the court to modify the fee or the
terms/conditions of compulsory license on grounds of events occurring, at a later date, and
justifying such modification. Especially, when the patentee has subsequently concluded a
contractual license, under conditions, more favourable compared to those of the compulsory
license, confers the right to request such modification.
Where the licensee seriously violate his obligations arising from the compulsory license or
where he continuously fails to fulfill them, the court may, upon request of the patentee cancel
the license, without prejudice to patentee’s right for compensation of damages.
Applicability of the Provisions pertaining to Contractual License
Article 119 :
Unless in contradiction with the provisions foreseen under Articles 114 and 118, the provisions
related to contractual licenses under Article 88 shall also apply to compulsory license.
50
SECTION THREE
Incentive to Apply for Compulsory License
Measures of Incentive for Compulsory License
Article 120 :
The Institute shall take measures of incentive to encourage filing of application for license in
relation with the patents, candidate for grant of compulsory license. To this end, the Institute
shall regularly announce such patents by way of publication.
Where use of patented inventions acquires importance, the Council of Ministers, shall take
financial, economic and other measures of incentive with a view to encourage undertakings at
filing application for compulsory license, on grounds of public interest, for determined patents.
PART EIGHT
Patents-of-Addition and Secret Patents
SECTION ONE
Patent-of-Addition
Application for a Patent-of-Addition
Article 121 :
The right holder of a patent or an application for a patent may apply for a patent-of-addition
for protecting inventions, which in the sense of paragraph one of Article 45, have unity with
the subject matter of the main patent and which improve or develop the invention, subject
matter of the main patent.
Until the date when the decision to grant the patent is reached, applications may be filed for
patent(s)-of-addition to an application for patent, even when the same is not accepted to issue
as a patent.
Surpassing the State-of-the-Art (in volving inventive activity/step) mentioned under Article 9
does not apply to patent(s)-of-addition.
Date of priority of Patents-of-Addition
Article 122 :
The date of priority of patents-of-addition is determined according to the date of filing of the
application.
51
The patents-of-addition have the same term than the term of the main patent and shall not be
subject to the payment of yearly annuities.
Unless otherwise foreseen in this present Decree-law the patent-of-addition is a
complementary part of the main patent.
Conversion of Patent-of-Addition into Main Patent
Article 123 :
At the request of the applicant, the application for a patent-of-addition may at any time, during
the prosecution of the application; be converted into an application for an independent (main)
patent. The same possibility may also be made use of, within the time-period of three months
following the notification to the applicant for a patent-of-addition of the fact that the
application for a patent-of-addition does not have the necessary connection/link with the main
patent, as a result of the examination conducted by the Institute.
Patents-of-addition accepted for grant may be converted into main patent provided the patentee
surrenders the right to the main patent.
Where a request is filed for converting a patent-of-addition into an independent (main) patent,
subsequent patent(s)-of-addition shall be deemed to constitute the additions of the new (main)
patent on the condition that they show the requested unity and comprehensiveness.
Patents-of-addition converted into main patents shall be subject to the payment of the yearly
patent annuity fees as of the date of their conversion while their term of protection shall be the
same as the term of protection of the main patent.
Application to Patents-of-Addition of provisions pertaining to Patents.
Article 124 :
Unless the contrary is specifically foreseen and unless they are incompatible with the
characteristics of patents-of-addition the provisions of this present Decree-Law pertaining to
patents shall also apply to patents-of-addition.
SECTION TWO
Secret Patent
Term and Conditions for keeping under secrecy
Article 125 :
The contents of an application for patent shall be kept secret, for a time-period of two months,
as from the date of filing of the application unless the Institute decides to disclose same earlier.
The Institute may extend the time-period during which the application for patent is kept under
secrecy up to five months as from the date of filing of the application, if it comes to consider
that the invention, subject matter of the application, is of importance for national defense. The
Institute shall notify the situation in writing to the applicant and shall instantly inform the
Ministry of National Defense by forwarding them the copy of the application.
For the purposes mentioned under the paragraphs one and two of this present Article, the
52
Institute and the Ministry of National Defense shall cooperate and shall determine the
inventions held to be of importance for national defense. The Ministry of National Defense has
authority to examine, beforehand, all applications for patent, under the condition to respect the
obligation to secrecy.
When national defense interests are of question, the Ministry of National Defense, by request
made (in writing) before the expiry of the said period of 5 months, may ask the Institute that
the application for patent be prosecuted under secrecy and that the applicant be kept informed
of such situation.
Where the application for patent or the patent is kept under secrecy, the applicant or the
patentee shall have to shun such acts as might convey information about the contents of the
invention to unauthorized persons.
The Ministry of National Defense, upon the request of the applicant or the patentee may allow
that the subject matter of the application for patent or of the patent be used, in part or in whole,
under the conditions to be laid down by the Ministry of National Defense.
Register for Secret Patents, Extension of Secrecy Period and Rescinding Secrecy
Article 126:
The patent issued under the rule of secrecy is entered in the, secretly held, Register for Secret
Patents, and shall be kept under secrecy for the length of one year as from the date of issue.
The secrecy period may be extended by period(s) of one year. The patentee shall be kept
informed in case of such extention.
Yearly extension of secrecy period shall not be implemented during war and until one year
after cease fire.
Upon the authorization of the Ministry of National Defense, the Institute, may, at any time,
rescind, the secrecy under which the patent or the application for patent has been placed.
Annuities and Compensation regarding Patents under Secrecy
Article 127 :
The payment of the yearly patent annuities shall not be mandatory, for secret patents.
The right holder of patent may claim compensation from the State for the length of the timeperiod
during which the patent is kept under secrecy. The compensation shall be claimed, at
the end of each (calendar) year, during which the patent has remained under secrecy, for the
said year. If no agreement is reached on the amount of compensation, the said amount shall be
determined by the court. The compensation shall be calculated taking into consideration the
importance of the invention and the income estimate in case the right holder of patent can
make free use of it.
Where the invention, subject matter of the secret patent is disclosed by a fault on the part of the
patentee, no right to claim compensation shall arise.
Obtention of authorization to file an Application in a foreign country for Patents under
Secrecy
Article 128 :
53
Where an invention made in Turkey is subject to the provision of Article 125, no application
for patent can be filed, in any foreign country, for the said invention, without the Institute’s
permission and before the expiry of a time-period of two months as from the date of filing of
the application for patent before the Institute. Permission to file an application in any foreign
country shall not be issued without the specific authorization of the Ministry of National
Defense.
Where the inventor is domiciled in Turkey, until proof to the contrary, the invention shall be
deemed to have been realized in Turkey.
PART NINE
Invalidation of a Patent and Termination of a Patent Right
SECTION ONE
Invalidation of a Patent
Invalidity
Article 129 :
A patent shall be declared invalid by the court in following situations :
a) where evidence is brought in that the subject matter of the invention does not meet the
patentability requirements as specified under Articles No. 5 to 10 of this present DecreeLaw;
b) where evidence is brought in that the subject matter of the invention has not been described
in a sufficiently explicit and comprehensive manner so as to enable a person skilled in the
concerned technical field to implement same;
c) where evidence is brought in that the subject matter of the patent exceeds the scope of the
application or is based on a divisional application filed in compliance with Article 45 or on
an application filed in compliance with Article 12 and exceeds the scope of same;
d) where evidence is brought in that the holder of the patent does not have the right to a patent
in accordance with Article 11.
Only the inventor or his successors in title shall have the right to invoke that the holder of the
patent does not have the right to a patent in accordance with Article 11. In such a case, Article
12 of this present Decree-Law shall apply.
Where the grounds for invalidity concern, only, part of a patent, a partial invalidation of same
shall be ruled by cancellation of the claim(s) pertaining to such part. An individual claim may
not be partially invalidated.
Where, as the result of a partial invalidation, the claim(s) of the patented invention which are
not canceled conform with the provisions of Articles 5 to 7 of this present Decree-Law, the
patent shall be valid for that part.
Application for a Declaration of Invalidity
Article 130 :
Persons adversely affected/prejudiced or interested official authorities, acting through the
Public Prosecutor, may request from the court the invalidation of a patent. Moreover, the
54
invalidity of a patent may, also, be put forward by persons entitled to claim the right to the
patent in accordance with subparagraph (d) of paragraph one of Article 129.
The Court action for the invalidation of a patent may be instituted during the term of protection
of same or within five years subsequent to the termination of patent right.
The Court action for the invalidation of a patent shall be instituted against the person who, at
the time when the action is instituted, is entered in the Patent Register as the holder of patent.
Notification shall be served to the persons entered in the Register as right holders of the patent,
to enable them to join the court action.
Effects of Invalidity
Article 131 :
A (Court) Decision ruling that the patent is invalid, shall have retroactive effect. Thus, within
the context of invalidation, the legal protection secured for an application for patent or for a
patent under this present Decree-Law shall be deemed not to have been borne at all.
The retroactive effects of invalidity, without prejudice to claims for compensation for damage
caused by acts of bad faith on the part of the holder of the patent, shall not extend to/affect the
following situations :
a) Any final decision for infringement of the patent reached and enforced prior to the decision
of invalidity;
b) Contracts concluded and executed prior to the decision of invalidity. However,
reimbursement, in whole or in part, of sums paid under the contract may be claimed on
grounds of legitimate reasons and of equity to an extent justifiable by the circumstances.
A decision of invalidity having become res judicata shall produce effect against all..
Effects of Invalidity on Patent-of-Addition
Article 132 :
The decision of invalidation of a patent shall not necessarily entail the invalidation of the
patents-of-addition. However, where no application is filed for the conversion of the patentsof-addition
to independent (main) patents within three months as from the date of the
notification of the decision of invalidation, the invalidation of a patent shall result in the
invalidation of the patents-of-addition as well.
SECTION TWO
Termination of a Patent Right
Causes for Termination
Article 133 :
A patent right shall terminate upon:
a) expiry of the term of protection;
b) surrender, by the holder of a patent, of the patent right;
c) non-payment of yearly annuities and additional fees, within the prescribed time-periods.
55
The subject matter of a patent right having terminated shall become public property as from the
moment when the ground for termination materializes. Such situation is published, by the
Institute, in the relevant bulletin.
In case of non-payment of yearly annuities, the ground for termination of a patent right shall be
deemed to materialize as of the date when the payment is due.
Non-payment of yearly annuities for reasons of Force Majeure
Article 134 :
Where a patent right terminates for non-payment of yearly annuities; with the holder of the
patent bringing evidence of force majeure for reasons of which the said fee could not be paid,
the patent shall be revalidated.
The claim related to force majeure shall be put forward within six months as from the
publication, in the bulletin, of the announcement pertaining to the termination of the patent
right.
The patentee’s claim related to force majeure is published in the bulletin. The parties interested
may express their observations on the matter within one month as from the date of publication.
The patent shall be revalidated upon the decision of the Institute. The revalidation of a patent
shall not affect the acquired rights of third parties who have secured such rights as a result of
the termination of the patent right. The rights of third parties and the scope of such rights shall
be determined by the court.
Where a patent is revalidated, the holder of the patent shall be obliged to pay the fees he failed
to pay and the additional fees.
Surrender of Right to a Patent
Article 135 :
The holder of a patent may surrender his right to the patent, in whole or in part for one or more
patent claim(s).
Where the right to a patent is surrendered in part, the patent remains in force for the claim/s
which have not been surrendered, provided such claim(s) do not constitute the subject matter
of another patent and the surrender of right does not result in extending the scope of the patent.
The surrender shall be declared in writing to the Institute. The surrender shall have effect as of
the date of entry in the Patent Register.
The holder of a patent cannot surrender his right to the patent without having the consent of the
licensees or holders of rights entered in the Patent Register.
Where a third party claims the ownership of a patent, surrender of right to the patent cannot be
requested without the consent of the concerned third party.
56
PART TEN
Infringement of Rights Conferred by a Patent and
Legal Proceedings in Case of Infringement
SECTION ONE
Situations of Infringement
Acts constituting infringement of Rights conferred by a Patent
Article 136 :
The following acts shall be considered infringement of rights conferred by a Patent:
a/ Imitating; by producing in whole or in part of a product, subject of the invention, without the
consent of the patent holder;
b/ Selling, distributing or commercializing in any other way, or importing for such purposes of
products or keeping them in possession for commercial purposes or using by applying such
products, manufactured as a result of an infringement, where the person concerned knows
or should know that such products are imitations in whole or, in part;
c/ Using the patented process or selling, distributing or commercializing in any other way or
importing for such purposes or using by applying the products directly obtained through
such patented process; without the consent of the patent holder;
d/ Enlarging the scope of the rights granted by the patent holder on the basis of a contractual
license or granted by compulsory license or transferring such rights to third persons,
without permission;
e/ Participating in acts foreseen in subparagraphs 1 to 4 of this present Article, or assisting or
inducing/encouraging them or facilitating, in any way and under any circumstances, their
occurrence/perpetration;
f/ Refraining from declaring the source from where and the manner how the products, found in
possession and manufactured or commercialized, unlawfully, were obtained.
Where the patent is obtained for a process for the production/preparation of a product, all
products, possessing the same properties, shall be deemed to have been
produced/manufactured by the patented process. The defendant claiming that the
manufactured/produced the product without infringing the patented process shall have the
burden of proving such claim.
Where the application for patent is published in accordance to Article 55 of this present
Decree-Law, the applicant is entitled to institute before the courts, civil and criminal,
proceedings, on grounds of infringement of the invention. Where the infringer is notified of the
existance of the application or of its scope, the application need not to have been published.
Where the court rules that the infringer is in bad faith, the infringement shall be deemed to
have existed even prior to the publication.
57
SECTION TWO
Legal Proceedings
Appeals/Claims of the Proprietor of a Patent and Competent Courts.
Article 137 :
A proprietor of a patent whose rights are infringed may, in particular, appeal for the following
at the Court:
a) for the cessation of the acts in infringement of right conferred by a patent,
b) appeal for remedies of infringement and request for compensation of material and moral
damages/prejudices incurred,
c) request the confiscation of products manufactured or imported, in infringement of rights
conferred by a patent, of means directly used in manufacturing such products and of means
permitting the use of a patented process,
d) appeal for the proprietorship over the products and means confiscated in accordance with
subparagraph three of this present paragraph. In such case, the value of said products shall
be deducted from the amount of compensation awarded. Where the value of said products
happen to be above the amount of compensation awarded, the proprietor of the patent shall
repay the excedentary balance to other party.
e) appeal for precautionary measures for preventing the continued infringement of rights,
conferred by a patent, especially modifying the shapes of the products and means, or, where
inevitable for the preclusion of acts of infringement, the destruction of the products and
means confiscated according to subparagraph three of this present paragraph.
f) request the disclosure by means of publication, to the public and to those related, of the
court’s judgment rendered against the party infringing the rights conferred by a patent who
shall bear the costs for such publication.
The competent court, for the institution of legal proceedings, by the proprietor of a patent
against third parties, is the court of the domicile of the plaintiff or of the place where the
offence was committed or of the place where the act of infringement produced effect.
Where the plaintiff is not domiciled in Turkey, the competent court is the court of the location
of the business premises of the empowered registered agent and when the agent’s entry in the
register has been canceled, the court where the headquarters of the Institute are located.
The Competent Court, for the institution of proceedings by third parties against the applicant
or the proprietor of a patent, is the court of domicile of the defendant. Where the applicant or
patent right holder is not domiciled in Turkey, the provisions of the third paragraph shall
prevail.
Where several courts are competent, the court before which the proceedings are first initiated
shall be the competent court.
58
Compensation
Article 138 :
A person who, without the consent of the proprietor of a patent, produces, sells, distributes or
puts in commerce under any form or imports for these purposes or keeps in possession for
commercial purposes, a product under patent protection or makes use of a process under patent
protection shall be liable to remedy the unlawful situation and to compensate the
prejudice/damages he has caused.
A person using, in any way, an invention under patent protection, who has been informed by
the proprietor of the patent, of its existence and of the infringement of same, and who has been
requested to stop such infringement, or where such use constitutes a faulty behaviour, shall be
liable to compensate the damages/prejudice he has caused.
Documents Evidencing Infringement
Article 139 :
The proprietor of a patent may request from the infringing party the documents related with the
use without his consent of the patent, for the evaluation of the damage/prejudice suffered
resulting from the infringement of the patent.
Non-realized Income
Article 140 :
The damage/prejudice suffered by the proprietor of the patent includes, not only the value of
the effective loss, but also includes the income non-realized because of the infringement of the
patent right.
The non-realized income shall be calculated in accordance with one of the following
evaluation methods, on the option of the proprietor of the patent who has suffered
damage/prejudice :
a) According to the income that the proprietor of the patent might have possibly generated if
the competition of the infringing party did not exist;
b) According to the income generated by the infringing party from the use of the patent;
c) According to a license fee that would have been paid if the party, infringing the patent right,
would have lawfully utilized the patent under a licensing contract.
In calculating the non-realized income, circumstances having effect on the case, such as, in
particular the economic value of the patent, the term of protection remaining at the time of
infringement, the type/nature and number of licences granted in respect of the patent shall be
taken into consideration.
Where the court is of the opinion that the right holder of a patent, has not fulfilled his
obligation to work the patent, in compliance with the provisions of this present Decree-Law,
the non-realized income shall be calculated according to subparagraph (c) of paragraph two, of
this present Article.
Increasing the non-realized Income
Article 141 :
59
Where the person right holder of a patent has selected one of the evaluation options specified
in the paragraph two, sub-paragraphs (a) or (b) of Article 140, in calculating the non-realized
income, the Court may add on a reasonable extra amount when, in court’s opinion, the patent
contributes substantially, from an economical aspect, to the manufacturing of the product or to
the use of the process.
The assessment of the patent’s contribution to the economic value of the product shall be
grounded on the verification that the patent constitutes the determining factor in creating the
demand for the product.
Reputation of the Invention
Article 142 :
The proprietor of a patent may request extra damages where the reputation of the invention,
subject matter of the patent, is harmed/prejudiced from the manufacturing in a bad or the
marketing in an improper manner of the patented invention, by the party violating the rights
conferred by the patent.
Reduction of Compensation
Article 143:
Where the amount of compensation to be paid to the right holder of a patent, happens to be
higher than the amount he receives from other persons, for their use of the invention in another
manner, the compensation allowed shall be reduced in consideration of such amount.
Persons Against whom no compensation may be claimed
Article 144 :
The proprietor of a patent may not institute proceedings, under the provisions of this present
Section of this Decree-Law, against those persons using the products put on the market, by the
person who has paid compensation for damages, to the proprietor of the patent.
Prescription of Time-Limit
Article 145 :
The provisions of the Code of Obligations on prescription of time-limit shall have effect
concerning the time-periods for appeals/claims, under civil provisions, relating to violations of
rights conferred by a patent.
SECTION THREE
Specialized Courts
Competent Courts
Article 146 :
Special courts to be established by the Ministry of Justice shall have jurisdiction for all of the
actions and claims provisioned by this present Decree-Law.
Upon the request/invitation of the Ministry of Justice, the High Council of Judges and
Prosecutors shall determine which of the Commercial Courts of the First Instance and the
60
Criminal Courts of the First Instance shall have competence as special courts and indicate their
respective jurisdictions.
For actions instituted against all of the Institute’s decisions taken in respect of the provision of
this present Decree-Law and for actions instituted against the Institute by third parties having
been damaged/prejudiced from the decisions of the Institute, the special court referred in the
first paragraph shall have competence.
Publication of the Court’s Decision
Article 147 :
Where a court judgment becomes res judicata, provided it has a legitimate ground or interest
the successful party may request the publication, in full or in summary, of the final judgment in
a daily paper, or by similar means, the costs of which are to be met by the other party.
The nature and extent of the publication shall be determined in the judgment. The right of
publication shall be void, if not exercised within three months after the judgment becomes res
judicata.
SECTION FOUR
Special Provisions
Claims by the Licensee and requirements therefor
Article 148 :
Unless provided otherwise by the contract, the holder of an exclusive license may, in the case
of an infringement of the patent rights, institute in his own name all legal proceedings which
have been made available to the proprietor of the patent by this present Decree-Law. Holders
of non-exclusive licenses do not have the right to institute legal proceedings.
In the case of an infringement, the holder of a (non-exclusive) license not having the right to
Institute proceedings according to paragraph one may give notice, through a notary public
requesting the proprietor of the patent to institute such proceedings as required.
In the event the proprietor of the patent right refuses to initiate or within three months of the
reception of the notice fails to institute proceedings, the (non-exclusive) license holder shall
have the right to institute proceedings, in his own name, by enclosing thereto, his notice to the
(proprietor) in this regard.
The licensee may, in the face of likelihood of serious damage (where elapsing of time cannot
be remedied), request the court to issue an injunction for precautionary measures without
waiting until the elapsing of said (3 months) period.
The licensee who has instituted proceedings in accordance of paragraph three, shall notify the
proprietor of the patent that the proceedings have been initiated.
Claiming of Non-infringement of a Patent and Requirements therefor
Article 149 :
61
Any interested person may institute proceedings against the proprietor of a patent to obtain a
judgment of non-infringement of rights conferred by the patent.
Prior to the institution of proceedings, referred in the first paragraph, a notice shall be served
through the notary public to the attention of the proprietor of the patent, to enable, the patent
right holder, to express his observations on whether industrial/manufacturing activity engaged
in Turkey or the serious and effective preparations made for such purpose, by the requesting
party constitute infringement of the rights conferred by the patent.
Where the proprietor of the patent upon receiving such a notice does not respond within one
month of receiving the notice, or the content of the response is not found acceptable by the
requesting party, the appealing party shall have the right to institute proceedings according to
the first paragraph.
Persons, against whom action of infringement has been instituted in respect of the patent right,
cannot institute proceedings according to paragraph one of this present Article.
Institution of proceedings shall be notified to all right holders entered in the Patent Register.
The actions referred to in this Article may also be instituted jointly with an action claiming
invalidity.
Action for Determination of Evidences
Article 150 :
Any person entitled (legally) to bring action against the infringement of patent right, may
appeal the court to determine and secure the acts which may/can be considered to infringe such
(patent) rights.
Precautionary Measures
Article 151 :
Persons who are to institute or who have instituted proceedings as prescribed by this present
Decree-Law, in order to ensure the effectiveness of the (main) action, may appeal the court to
order precautionary measures provided that they bring evidence as to the existence of acts of
actual use in Turkey of the patent or serious and effective preparations to use the patent against
which the action is instituted, which would constitute an infringement of the plaintiff’s patent
right.
The request for precautionary measures may be filed before or with the institution of
proceedings or filed later. The request for precautionary measures shall be examined separately
from the main action.
Nature of Precautionary Measures
Article 152 :
Precautionary measures shall be in nature to enable of securing fully the effectiveness of the
judgment and particularly provide the following measures:
a) cessation of the acts infringing the patent rights of the plaintiff;
62
b) injunction to seize within the borders of Turkey, wherever they are seen/found including the
customs, free ports or free trade areas and keep in custody the goods produced or imported
in infringement of rights conferred by the patent or means used in implementing the
patented process,
c) ordering the placement of security/guarantee for damages to be compensated.
Code of Civil Procedures
Article 153 :
With respect to other matters for securing of evidences and for precautionary measures the
provisions of the Code of Civil Procedures shall have effect.
PART ELEVEN
Utility Model Certificates
Inventions Protected by Granting Utility Model Certificates
Article 154 :
Inventions which are novel according to Article 156 of this present Decree-Law and applicable
in industry in the sense of Article 10 of this present Decree-Law shall be protected by grant of
Utility Model Certificate.
Inventions and subject matter non-patentable by Grant of Utility Model Certificate
Article 155 :
No Utility Model Certificate shall be granted for subject matters mentioned in Article 6 of this
present Decree-Law as well as for processes and products obtained by such processes and for
chemical products.
Novelty
Article 156 :
The invention, subject matter of the application for utility model certificate, shall not be
deemed to be novel when prior to the date of filing the application, it has been rendered
accessible to the public, whether in Turkey or in the world, by disclosure in writing or in any
other way or when it has been put to use within the country, whether regionally or nationwide.
Disclosure, whether by publication or in any other way or use, by the applicant for utility
model certificate or his predecessors, twelve months prior to the date of filing of the
application or to the date of priority, if any, shall not be deemed to be destructive of the
novelty of the invention, subject matter of the application.
Applications filed in Turkey for patents or for utility model certificates prior to the date of
filing the application for Utility Model Certificate shall be deemed to be destructive of the
novelty of the application for Utility Model Certificate even when they are published
subsequently to the date of filing of the application for Utility Model Certificate.
63
Right to Apply for a Utility Model Certificate
Article 157 :
The right to apply for a utility model certificate shall belong to the inventor or to his successor
in title and shall be transferable.
Where the invention, subject matter of the Utility Model Certificate, has been made, jointly,
by more than one person, the right to apply for a utility model certificate shall belong to them
jointly, unless the parties decide otherwise. On this subject the joint ownership provisions of
the Civil Law shall apply.
Where the same invention, subject matter of the Utility Model Certificate, has been made, at
the same time, by more than one person, independently from each other, and one of them has
filed an application, the provisions of Article 11 and 12 of this present Decree-Law shall apply
for determining the person entitled to the right to apply for a utility model certificate.
Rights May not be invoked Against Third Persons
Article 158 :
Where the core of the invention, subject matter of the utility model certificate, has been
taken/copied from the description, drawings and models, equipment and installation of third
party(ies) without their authorization, the holder of the utility model certificate may not invoke
the protection conferred by the utility model certificate granted under this present Decree-Law
against said third parties.
Until the court action for cancellation instituted in accordance with the provisions of Article
156 against him comes to a conclusion, the holder of the utility model certificate may not
invoke the rights conferred by that certificate against third parties. For this reason, the related
parties shall apply to the Institute for the entry in the register of the instituted court action and
the resulting decision and their publication in the related Bulletin. The right of the holder of the
utility model certificate to claim compensation remains reserved.
Application for Utility Model Certificate
Article 159 :
In order to obtain a utility model certificate, the documents cited in Article 42 of this present
Decree-Law shall be filed before Institute with the application, stating clearly that protection
by grant of utility model certificate is requested.
The provisions of Articles 43 and 53 of this present Decree-Law shall apply for rendering
definite (fixing) the date of filing of the application for Utility Model Certificate.
Examination of the Application as to Formal Requirements and its Publication
Article 160 :
Upon the date of filing of the application becoming definite, the Institute shall examine the
compliance of the application to formal requirements set forth in Articles 42 to 53 and in the
Regulation.
Where the examination of the Institute shows that the application suffers formal deficiencies or
that the subject matter of the application does not possess the characteristics permitting the
grant of utility model certificate in compliance with the provisions of Article 154 and 155, the
64
procedure shall be suspended. The Institute shall notify the applicant of its motivated decision
by citing therein the grounds therefor and shall grant the applicant a time-period of three
months, as from the notification of its decision, to rectify the deficiencies, to amend the
claim(s) or to object to it.
After consideration of the observations of the applicant and of the amendments in the
application, if any, the Institute shall take its final decision. The final decision of the Institute
may consist in granting the utility model certificate for all or part of the claims.
Where the examination concerning the compliance to formal requirements results in that there
is no deficiency preventing the grant of protection or that such deficiency has been
satisfactorily rectified, the Institute shall notify the applicant of the favorable decision to
further publish the description, claim(s) and the drawings, if any, in accordance with the
provisions set forth in the Regulation. The applications are published in the related Bulletin
under the form and according to requirements prescribed in the Regulation.
The State-of-the-Art Search Report foreseen to be established by the Institute in respect of
patents shall not be established for utility model certificates. However, upon filing the private
request of the applicant or registrant of the utility model certificate, before the Institute for the
establishment of the Search Report on the State-of-the-Art, such report shall also be
established for the Utility Model Certificate.
Opposition by Third Parties
Article 161 :
Within three months following the publication of the application, any person or
body/institution, with an interest, may oppose the application for the grant of the utility model
certificate by giving the motives/grounds therefor. The opposition shall be motivated by
putting forward that the requirements for the grant of the Utility Model Certificate are not
fulfilled; in particular, the lack of novelty in accordance with Article 156 or the inadequacy of
the description not being explicit and comprehensive enough to enable the implementation of
the invention.
Documentary evidence in support thereof shall be enclosed to the opposition (to be) made in
written form.
.
Upon the expiry of the period for opposition, the Institute shall notify the applicant the
oppositions raised.
Within three months following the notification of the oppositions raised, the applicant may put
forward his motivated observations against the oppositions raised or may amend the claim(s),
if he deems it appropriate or may request the Institute to issue the certificate without taking
into consideration the oppositions raised.
Courts have competence in respect of claims according to which the applicant is not entitled to
request a utility model certificate. Oppositions made to the Institute having regard to such
claims shall not be accepted.
Decision of the Institute, Grant of a Utility Model Certificate and its Publication
Article 162 :
65
Where the applicant has filed his observations against the objections raised or has effected the
requested amendments or the time-period granted to the applicant to respond to the objections
has lapsed, the Institute shall decide to grant the utility model certificate without taking into
consideration the objections raised by third parties and notifies the applicant of its decision by
requesting the payment within three months of the relevant fee set forth in the Regulation.
Where the prescribed fee is not paid within three months from the date of notification or no
request for an extention of said period is filed, the utility model certificate shall not be issued
and the application shall be deemed to have been withdrawn.
The description referred to in Article 61 of this present Decree-Law shall not be published for
utility model certificates.
The State does not guarantee the very existence/reality and the usefulness/utility of the subject
matter of the utility model certificate.
The issuance of a Utility Model Certificate shall be published in the related Bulletin. The
publication shall include the following particulars:
a- The number of the certificate,
b- The Classification Code(s) of the Invention,
c- The title clearly describing the subject matter of the invention,
d- The name, nationality and domicile of the holder of the certificate,
e- Abstract,
f- The date and number of the issue of the Bulletin in which the application for utility model
certificate is published,
g- The date of issue of the certificate,
h- The statement announcing the possibility of consulting/inspecting the documentation
concerning the (granted) utility model certificate and the objections raised and the
observations against these objections.
Objections as to the Formal Deficiencies Subsequent to the Grant of a Utility Model
Certificate
Article 163 :
To the exception of the provision of Article 45 pertaining to the unity of the invention, third
parties shall be entitled to raise objections before the Institute against the grant of Utility
Model Certificate on grounds of formal deficiencies to comply with the procedural
requirements provided under Articles 42 to 52. In order to raise such an objection there is no
need to have previously objected following the publication of the application for Utility Model
Certificate.
To the exception of the matter of unity of the invention, where the Institute had failed during
the examination to perform one of the actions to be formally effected according to the
procedure for granting Utility Model Certificate as set forth in Article 42 to 51, or where the
Institute has omitted to perform an essential formal procedural action, the decision of the
Institute to rectify such deficiency in consideration of the objection raised shall have the effect
to annule the administrative actions pertaining to the grant of the Utility Model Certificate
retrospectively to the stage of the procedure where the concerned deficiency occurred and to
reengage the procedure from that stage onwards so as to perform anew all such actions.
66
Form and Term of Protection
Article 164 :
The holder of a utility model certificate benefits from the same protection conferred to the
patent holder.
The Utility Model Certificate is granted for a period of 10 years as from the date of filing of
the application. This term shall not be extended.
Within the meaning of Article 121 of this present Decree-Law, certificates-of-addition to
utility model certificates shall not be granted.
Invalidation of a Utility Model Certificate
Article 165 :
The invalidity of the Utility Model Certificate shall be decided by the competent court under to
the following situations:
a/ where evidence is brought in that the subject matter of the utility model certificate does not
comply with the provisions of Articles 154, 155 and 156 of this present Decree-Law;
b/ where evidence is brought in that the invention, subject matter of the utility model
certificate, has not been described in a sufficiently explicit and comprehensive manner so as
to enable its implementation by a person skilled in that field;
c/ where evidence is brought in that the subject matter of the utility model certificate exceeds
the scope of the application filed for utility model certificate or, in that the subject matter of
the utility model exceeds the scope of the application as originally filed, in case where the
utility model certificate is based on a divisional application filed according to Article 45 or
on an application filed according to Article 12;
d/ where evidence is brought in that the holder of the utility model certificate does not have the
right to a Utility Model Certificate in accordance with Article 157.
The invalidation of the utility model certificate can be requested by third parties suffering
damages/prejudices or by the interested official authorities/bodies, acting through the public
prosecutor, or by those persons entitled to request the utility model certificate in accordance
with paragraph one (d) of this present article.
In order to qualify to request the invalidation of the utility model certificate, third parties
suffering damage/prejudice and the interested official authorities/bodies must have raised
opposition in compliance with the provisions of Article 161.
The invalidation of the utility model certificate may be requested, at any time, during its term
of protection.
The claim that the holder of the utility model certificate is not entitled to apply to obtain such
certificate in compliance with Article 157 may only be invoked by the inventor or by his
successors in title. In such case, Article 12 of this present Decree-Law shall apply.
Where the grounds for invalidation affect only part of the utility model certificate, it shall be
decided to partially invalidate same through the cancellation of the claim or claims related to
the concerned part. An individual claim may not be partially invalidated.
67
Where the invalidation is partial, the utility model certificate shall remain in force in respect of
claim(s) having not been invalidated, provided that these claim(s) comply with the provisions
of Articles 5 to 7 of this present Decree-Law.
Where the utility model certificate is issued without taking into consideration the motivated
oppositions raised by third parties and where, on grounds of causal relation with the opposition
raised, the court has decided to invalidate the utility model certificate, according to this present
Article, third parties having raised opposition and suffered damage/prejudice shall have the
right to claim compensation from the holder of the invalidated Utility Model Certificate.
Application of Provisions pertaining to Patents
Article 166 :
In the absence of provisions specifically applicable to utility model certificates, the provisions
pertaining to patents as set forth in this present Decree-Law shall apply likewise, for utility
model certificates, provided that they are not incompatible with the characteristic of utility
model certificates.
Converting an Application for Utility Model Certificate into an Application for Patent
Article 167 :
The applicant for a utility model certificate may request the Institute to convert the concerned
application in to an application for patent prior to the decision of the Institute to grant the
utility model certificate.
Within one month from the date of such request, the Institute shall notify the applicant that the
application for Utility Model Certificate will be further prosecuted as an application for patent
and shall inform him of the documents required to be submitted to this effect. The applicant
shall file the requested documents within one month from the date of notification of the
Institute. Where the applicant fails to file the required documents within this time-period, the
request for conversion shall be deemed not to have been made and the subject application
shall be further prosecuted as an application for a utility model certificate.
When the application for utility model certificate is converted into an application for patent,
the application for utility model certificate shall remain without effect.
When the application for utility model certificate is converted into an application for patent the
priority right(s), if any, claimed under the application for utility model certificate shall benefit
likewise to the application for patent which will be effective as from the date of filing of the
application for utility model certificate.
Following the filing, by the applicant, of the documents requested, according to paragraph four
of this present article, the conversion of the application for utility model certificate into an
application for patent shall be published in the Bulletin. The date and number of the issue of
the Bulletin wherein the application for utility model certificate and enclosures have been
published shall also be mentioned in this publication.
Converting an Application for Patent into an application for Utility Model Certificate
68
Article 168 :
The provisions of Article 65 of this present Decree-Law shall apply for converting an
application for patent into an application for utility model Certificate.
Registration of subject matter of Utility Model Certificate as an Industrial Design
Article 169 :
The subject matter of a utility model Certificate may also be registered as an industrial design.
In such case, the provisions of the related act shall apply.
Impossibility to Concurrently Grant a Utility Model Certificate and a Letter’s Patent for the
same Invention
Article 170 :
A Letter’s Patent and a Utility Model Certificate shall not be concurrently granted for an
invention involving the same subject matter. The conversion of an application for patent or an
application for utility model Certificate into the other, can be effected only in compliance with
the provisions of Articles 65, 167 and 168.
PART TWELVE
Persons Authorized to Act (Before the Institute) and Agents
Persons Authorized to Act (Before the Institute)
Article 171 :
The following persons have capacity to act before the Institute :
a) natural or legal persons,
b) patent agents entered in the records of the Institute.
Legal persons may be represented by those person(s) duly empowered by their authorised
bodies/organs.
The persons domiciled abroad can only be represented by patent agents.
Where an agent has been appointed, all procedures are executed through the agent. All notices
made to the agent shall be deemed to have been made to the principal.
PART THIRTEEN
Payment of Fees and Legal Effects thereof
Payment of Fees and Legal Effects thereof
Article 172 :
The fees relating to an application for patent and to a patent as set forth in the Regulation shall
be paid by the applicant or by the right the holder of the patent or by the patent agent.
69
The time-period for the payment of all fees as required and set forth in the Regulation shall be
notified, in advance, by the Institute, to the applicant or to the right holder of the patent or to
the patent agent.
Where a fee of a particular formality is not paid within the time-period set forth in the
Regulation, the said formality shall not produce any effect and result, as from the date when
the situation is notified by the Institute to the applicant.
Where the prescribed fees for the grant of a patent have not been paid within the time-period
provisioned by this present Decree-Law, the application for the patent shall be deemed to have
been withdrawn.
Yearly Annuities
Article 173 :
The annuities as set forth in the Regulation and necessary for maintaining the validity of an
application for patent or of a patent shall be paid yearly, in advance, at each anniversary date,
during the term of protection of patent. The said annuities are due for payment each year on the
month and day corresponding to the month and day of the date of filing of the application.
Where the annuities are not paid within the time-period prescribed in paragraph one of this
present Article, same may be paid within the subsequent (grace) period of six months by
paying an extra fee.
Where the annuities are not paid within the time-period prescribed in paragraph one of this
present Article, the patent right shall expire on the last day when such payment is due.
PART FOURTEEN
LAST PROVISIONS
Provisions Repealed
Article 174 :
Article 174 has been repealed as of the following provision of Law No. 4128 dated November
7, 1995.
“The Patent Act dated March 10, 1296 (March 23, 1879) and its additions and amendments
and Article 174 of the Decree-Law have been repealed”.
Entry Into Force
Article 175 :
This present Decree-Law shall enter into force on the day of its publication.
Implementation
Article 176 :
This present Decree-Law shall be implemented by the Council of Ministers.
70
TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS
Application of Previous Provisions
Transitional Article 1 – For applications for patent filed prior to the entry into force of this
present Decree-Law, the provisions of the act in force on the date of filing the application shall
have effect.
Without prejudice to acquired rights in respect of all acts of transfer, inheritance and licensing
contracts concluded and registered prior to the entry in force of this present Decree-Law, for
any further actions and for all changes on such matters, the provisions of this present DecreeLaw
shall prevail.
Establishment of the State-of-the-Art Search Report until the setting up by the Institute of
the organization necessary for establishing such reports
Transitional Article 2 – The State-of-the-Art (Standard) Search Report which is to be
established by the Institute according to the provisions of this present Decree-Law, shall be
established by the internationally recognized Search Authorities, until the time, when the
Institute completes its organization permitting it to establish such reports.
Payment of Yearly Annuities
Transitional Article 3 – With regard to applications for patent having lapsed for non-payment
of the yearly annuities and fees within the prescribed time-period, the patent right shall be
restored/reinstated when the fees, due for payment in previous years, are paid, as set forth in
the Regulation, by paying an additional fee amounting to twice the amount of the concerned
fees, within six months as from the date of notification of the Institute. This provision shall
only apply when the term of protection of the patent has not already expired.
Protection of Pharmaceutical Products and of Processes for their Production/Preparation
Transitional Article 4 – The protection provided by letter’s patent within the scope of this
present Decree-Law pertaining to pharmaceutical and veterinary products/substances
and to their process of preparation/production shall commence on January 1, 1999.
Transitional Article 4 as amended by the Decree-Law No. 566 dated September 22, 1995.