When a competitor claims bad faith: what to do first
When a competitor claims your trade mark was filed in bad faith, treat the claim as procedural, not personal. Preserve the filing history, keep communication in writing, and route the file to whoever can respond before the deadline. Do not amend the registration, negotiate a settlement, or withdraw filings until the ground and forum are clear.
The legal basis
Bad faith is a ground for invalidity under Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 (EUTMR), which governs European Union trade marks from application to cancellation. The EUTMR treats bad faith as a state of mind at the filing date, not a comment on how the mark has been used since. A claim of bad faith attacks the validity of the registration itself, not its scope and not its renewal.
What changes in practice
A bad-faith claim changes the risk profile of the whole registration, not one dispute. Licensing income, security interests, and use in ongoing agreements all depend on the mark surviving the challenge. Until the claim is resolved, treat the registration as contested rather than settled, even where any parallel infringement proceedings are paused.
What to do first
- Instruct in-house counsel or the responsible partner to open a file and log the date the claim was received.
- Pull the complete filing history: application date, any priority claim, and correspondence with the office.
- Identify the forum: the EUIPO Cancellation Division for a stand-alone invalidity action, or a national court where bad faith is raised as a counterclaim.
- Check the notice for a response deadline and calendar it before doing anything else.
- Hold off on settlement offers, rebranding, or licence amendments until counsel confirms the ground actually pleaded.
- Brief whoever negotiated the original filing; their record of the commercial rationale is the core evidence.
Who decides, and how
Two forums can hear a bad-faith claim against an EU trade mark, and the choice is not the claimant's alone.
| Forum | What it decides | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| EUIPO Cancellation Division | Invalidity of an EU trade mark for bad faith, on application | EUTMR |
| National court acting as an EU trade mark court | Bad faith raised as a counterclaim inside infringement proceedings | EUTMR |
Evidence turns on intention at the filing date: prior dealings with the claimant, knowledge of an earlier unregistered sign, and the commercial logic for choosing that particular mark. Design registrations sit under separate rules; the framework described here concerns trade marks.
If your situation differs
If the same portfolio secures financing, read When a portfolio is pledged to a lender and the trade mark itself comes under challenge, before contacting the lender.
If the mark is embedded in an ongoing licence or software agreement, a bad-faith challenge can trigger contract review in parallel: see When a customer demands unlimited liability: what it costs to weigh exposure under that agreement.
If the brand also underpins a token issuance, the same uncertainty affects the offering itself; When the offering document is questioned explained sets out the parallel exposure.
What this page does not cover
This page sets out procedure only: who can raise a bad-faith claim, where, and on what timetable. It does not establish which registrations, licences or contracts exist in a given jurisdiction, or what can be verified about a specific asset. That mapping is a separate exercise; Asset in Belgium explained is one example of how such a file is built for a single country.
Verified
Reviewed: 4 March 2025. Primary source: Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 (EUTMR), consolidated text as published on EUR-Lex. No case-specific figures or deadlines are stated on this page; the office or court handling your matter sets the applicable timetable in its own notice.
Related publications
A related question turns on use rather than validity: What to do first in this situation and who decides applies where the mark in practice differs from its registration.
FAQ
What is the first step when a competitor claims bad faith?
Log the date the claim arrived, and calendar the deadline stated in the notice. Do this before assessing the merits or contacting the competitor.
Which deadline is already running?
The office or court sets a period to respond, stated in the notice you received. Treat it as running from receipt, not from your own assessment of the merits.
Who decides, and on what evidence?
EUIPO's Cancellation Division decides stand-alone invalidity actions; a national court decides where bad faith is raised inside an infringement case. Both weigh intention at the filing date, not conduct afterwards.
If a bad-faith claim has reached your desk, a first response in minutes during working hours is available, and a written view of scope and next steps follows within one business day.