Creative and IP rights · France and Switzerland : separate country-labelled rules
Trademark non-use: organise use and revocation proof
Non-use revocation challenges the continued protection of a registered mark. It differs from an opposition response and from a pre-filing search. France and Switzerland have separate administrative and judicial routes. Identify the registered goods, relevant periods, genuine-use evidence and asserted reasons for non-use. An unsuccessful web search alone is not the same as an established revocation case.
- Official texts cited
- Sources checked on
- Drafted with AI assistance, our method
General legal information with official references and dated checks. It is not personalised advice: for a decision that commits you, have your situation checked by a qualified professional.
Julie by AlphaDeep
When does the relevant period begin?
French and Swiss five-year rules have different commencement conditions. Do not start both mechanically on the registration date.
Read the referencesYour question concerns “Trademark non-use: organise use and revocation proof”. I can help organise the facts and records. Which document have you received or prepared, and is this a French or Swiss matter?
3 free questions at signup. Avoid names and sensitive information.
Which goods are challenged for non-use?
Separate challenged goods from the rest of the registration. Revocation can concern only part of its scope.
Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L714-5Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L716-3232.11 : Art. 12 Conséquences du non-usage232.11 : Art. 35 a Demande de radiation232.11 : Art. 35 b DécisionINPI : Demander la nullité ou la déchéance d’une marque
Which records are still missing from your file?
Indicate which records you have. The result identifies gaps and prepares a complete question for Julie, without requiring an account.
Fictional example · Your preparation
Point to complete: Reasons for non-use. Identify and document the just reasons relied on. Ordinary commercial difficulty is not automatically a sufficient excuse.
- Trademark and goods
- Record available
- Use periods
- Record available
- Exploitation records
- Record available
- Reasons for non-use
- Needs checking
- Records indicated
- 3 / 4
- What reasons explain non-use?
This worksheet organises records; it does not establish admissibility, entitlement or a procedural outcome.
When does the relevant period begin?
French and Swiss five-year rules have different commencement conditions. Do not start both mechanically on the registration date.
Which documents answer which questions?
| Record or information | Issue to check |
|---|---|
| Trademark and goods | Separate challenged goods from the rest of the registration. Revocation can concern only part of its scope. |
| Use periods | French and Swiss five-year rules have different commencement conditions. Do not start both mechanically on the registration date. |
| Exploitation records | Connect date, used sign, territory and goods. One invoice does not necessarily prove all alleged use. |
| Reasons for non-use | Identify and document the just reasons relied on. Ordinary commercial difficulty is not automatically a sufficient excuse. |
Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L714-5Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L716-3232.11 : Art. 12 Conséquences du non-usage232.11 : Art. 35 a Demande de radiation232.11 : Art. 35 b DécisionINPI : Demander la nullité ou la déchéance d’une marque
What does each use record show?
Connect date, used sign, territory and goods. One invoice does not necessarily prove all alleged use.
What reasons explain non-use?
Identify and document the just reasons relied on. Ordinary commercial difficulty is not automatically a sufficient excuse.
Does resumed use settle the French case?
French restart-of-use rules and their qualifications need examination. Recent use does not automatically erase the relevant history.
Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L714-5Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L716-3232.11 : Art. 12 Conséquences du non-usage232.11 : Art. 35 a Demande de radiation232.11 : Art. 35 b DécisionINPI : Demander la nullité ou la déchéance d’une marque
Which official provision helps explain this situation?
Encourt la déchéance de ses droits le titulaire de la marque qui, sans justes motifs, n'en a pas fait un usage sérieux, pour les produits ou services pour lesquels la marque est enregistrée, pendant une période ininterrompue de cinq ans. Le point de départ de cette période est fixé au plus tôt à la date de l'enregistrement de la marque suivant les modalités précisées par un décret en Conseil d'Etat.
In plain English: French and Swiss five-year rules have different commencement conditions. Do not start both mechanically on the registration date.
What matters for the Swiss cancellation request?
Swiss LPM12 and35a/35b set their own timing and plausibility framework. The opposition period's expiry or completion can matter to commencement.
Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L714-5Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L716-3232.11 : Art. 12 Conséquences du non-usage232.11 : Art. 35 a Demande de radiation232.11 : Art. 35 b DécisionINPI : Demander la nullité ou la déchéance d’une marque
Which evidence costs should be prepared?
Separate collection, translation and representation. A filing cost is not a guarantee that cancellation will follow.
What does the use matrix produce?
It links period, goods, documents and gaps. It does not revoke the mark or finally decide genuine use.
What other questions arise in this file?
When does the relevant period begin?
French and Swiss five-year rules have different commencement conditions. Do not start both mechanically on the registration date.
Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L714-5Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L716-3232.11 : Art. 12 Conséquences du non-usage232.11 : Art. 35 a Demande de radiation232.11 : Art. 35 b DécisionINPI : Demander la nullité ou la déchéance d’une marque
What reasons explain non-use?
Identify and document the just reasons relied on. Ordinary commercial difficulty is not automatically a sufficient excuse.
Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L714-5Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L716-3232.11 : Art. 12 Conséquences du non-usage232.11 : Art. 35 a Demande de radiation232.11 : Art. 35 b DécisionINPI : Demander la nullité ou la déchéance d’une marque
Does resumed use settle the French case?
French restart-of-use rules and their qualifications need examination. Recent use does not automatically erase the relevant history.
Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L714-5Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L716-3232.11 : Art. 12 Conséquences du non-usage232.11 : Art. 35 a Demande de radiation232.11 : Art. 35 b DécisionINPI : Demander la nullité ou la déchéance d’une marque
Which evidence costs should be prepared?
Separate collection, translation and representation. A filing cost is not a guarantee that cancellation will follow.
Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L714-5Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L716-3232.11 : Art. 12 Conséquences du non-usage232.11 : Art. 35 a Demande de radiation232.11 : Art. 35 b DécisionINPI : Demander la nullité ou la déchéance d’une marque
Which official references should you consult?
- Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L714-5Légifrance
- Code de la propriété intellectuelle art. L716-3Légifrance
- 232.11 : Art. 12 Conséquences du non-usageFedlex
- 232.11 : Art. 35 a Demande de radiationFedlex
- 232.11 : Art. 35 b DécisionFedlex
- INPI : Demander la nullité ou la déchéance d’une marqueSource officielle
Texts cited last checked: 1 November 2026