When a distributor registered your brand locally: what to do first
A distributor cannot keep a mark it registered without your authorisation. Under Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 (EUTMR), an EU trade mark filed by an agent or representative without the proprietor's consent can be challenged by that proprietor. For a national registration, an equivalent route exists in the applicable national law. Act before any use deadline starts running against you.
The legal basis
Two instruments matter here, and only one usually applies to a local filing.
Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 (EUTMR) governs EU trade marks. It lets the rightful proprietor challenge a mark filed by an agent, distributor, or representative in that party's own name, without the proprietor's authorisation. The provision assumes a relationship of trust: the filer is expected to act for the principal, not against it.
If the distributor filed a national mark rather than an EU mark, the EUTMR does not apply directly to that filing. National law implementing the harmonised EU framework carries an equivalent rule in most member states. The mechanism differs by state; the underlying logic does not. A party who acted for you cannot then register your mark for itself.
Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 becomes relevant only later, and only if goods bearing the mark cross an external EU border while entitlement to the mark is still disputed. It is a customs tool, not a route to settle ownership.
What changes for you
A disputed local registration blocks your own filing route in that country for as long as it stands. Trying to register the same mark while the distributor's registration is active invites a refusal on relative grounds from the office. Continuing to trade under the mark without challenging the filing lets the distributor's position harden through use. Any licence, invoice, or catalogue that names the distributor as brand owner works against you later. Stop issuing new material that repeats that framing while the dispute is open.
What to do first
- Instruct counsel to pull the full filing history of the local registration: filing date, the applicant's declared relationship to you, and any claimed priority.
- Compare that filing date against every distribution, licence, or agency agreement you hold with the same party. The agreement's date decides whether a duty of trust existed at the moment of filing.
- Have counsel send a formal notice to the distributor identifying the unauthorised filing and demanding its withdrawal or transfer, before any public statement is made to customers or partners.
- File an opposition, invalidity action, or transfer request with the competent office within its applicable time window. Do not wait for a negotiated outcome before filing.
- Audit current supply and marketing material for anything that still describes the distributor as the mark's owner, and instruct your team to stop using it immediately.
Who decides, and on what timeline
| Situation | Forum | What decides it |
|---|---|---|
| EU trade mark filed by the distributor | EUIPO, then its Boards of Appeal | Whether the filer acted as agent or representative, without your consent, at the filing date |
| National mark filed by the distributor | The national trade mark office, then national courts | The same relationship of trust, assessed under the applicable national law |
| Mark already in visible use by the distributor | National courts | Evidence of use, evidence of consent, and the sequence of both over time |
Each of these forums runs its own clock, set by its own procedure, and published by the office itself; it is not fixed by contract. If goods bearing the mark are already moving across a border while the dispute runs, a parallel question arises: When a customs authority detains a shipment and its limits differ from a trade mark dispute and run on their own separate clock.
Which branch applies to you
If the distributor filed before your agreement existed, the trust argument weakens; a written record of the agreement's actual start date becomes central to your case. If the distributor filed after the agreement started but never disclosed the filing to you, non-disclosure itself supports your challenge, regardless of the outcome the office reaches on the merits.
If the distributor also manufactures or packages the goods through a subcontractor abroad, ownership of the mark is not the only exposure worth checking. When the outsourcing provider subcontracts abroad: what to do covers the separate question of contractual control over that chain, and it should be reviewed alongside the mark dispute, not instead of it.
If the same mark also appears on third-party marketplace listings that the distributor controls, the registration dispute and the listing dispute run on different tracks and need separate action.
Sources and limits
This page does not decide your case, set a fee, or fix the exact deadline that applies to your filing; each office publishes its own procedure and its own time window. It does not cover reserve evidence behind a tokenised asset; that separate question is addressed in When reserves must be evidenced and its limits. For a broader view of how provenance evidence is organised for a single jurisdiction, see Asset in Estonia explained.
Verified: 5 June 2025. Primary sources: Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 (EUTMR); Regulation (EU) No 608/2013.
Related situations
A registration dispute and a marketplace takedown often surface at the same time, once a distributor's filing becomes visible on a storefront. When a marketplace listing is taken down in detail sets out that separate procedure.
Frequently asked questions
What is the first step when a distributor registered your brand locally?
Instruct counsel to obtain the full filing history of the registration and compare its date against your distribution or agency agreement. That comparison decides which challenge route is open to you.
Which deadline is already running?
An opposition, invalidity, or transfer action runs against a time window set by the competent office and published in that office's own procedure. The exact window depends on the forum in the table above, not on your agreement with the distributor.
Who decides, and on what evidence?
EUIPO or the national office decides first, on the filing record and any agreement you submit; either party can appeal to the Boards of Appeal or to national courts. The decision turns on the relationship of trust at the filing date, not on later use.