Introduction

December 31, 2025, marks a critical date for businesses holding trademarks in both the United Kingdom and the European Union. Five years will have passed since the end of the Brexit transition period on December 31, 2020. However, this deadline is not merely an administrative calendar event ;  It marks the definitive end of a transitional regime that still allowed, under certain conditions, reliance on prior use of a trademark in the   European Union to secure UK rights derived from the “cloning” mechanism.

Starting January 1, 2026, a significant portion of European and UK trademark portfolios will enter a phase of increased legal vulnerability. Actions for revocation due to non-use will become more effective, and oppositions will demand stronger evidence. Historically protective trademarks that have been little or not exploited in the UK will gradually lose their deterrent effect.

For EU trademarks filed before Brexit, UK use will no longer have any evidentiary value to prove use of a sign in the European Union. This change, already noticeable in EUIPO case law, will be fully operationnal by the end of 2025.

This deadline should be approached  to conduct a comprehensive strategic audit : understanding the new legal dynamics, assessing exposure to risks, consolidating evidence of use, and adjusting filing and defense strategies. In other words : reassess, refile when justified, and revoke when blocking trademarks no longer have defensible usage use behind them.

Understanding the post-Brexit deadline of December 31, 2025 : a turning point for use

After the transition period, the UKIPO automatically created national “cloned” trademarks based on existing EU trademarks as of December 31, 2020. These titles ensured legal continuity for the rights holders.

Use in the EU prior to Brexit could still be taken into account to defend these UK trademarks, particularly in revocation actions.

December 31, 2025, marks the permanent end of this corrective mechanism. From that date onward, prior usage in the EU can no longer be invoked to justify maintaining a cloned trademark in the UK.

The consequences are clear :

  • Any UK trademark resulting from cloning must demonstrate genuine use within the UK, or accept increased vulnerability.

Use of an EU trade mark prior to 2020 within the territory of the United Kingdom can no longer be relied upon to establish genuine use within the European Union.Thus, the 2025 deadline establishes a simple principle : usage must be territorially relevant, without any residual effect from Brexit.

 

timeline trademark Brexit

Measuring the legal impact of Brexit on trademarks : proof of use, oppositions, and revocation

Trademark law is based on a fundamental balance : monopoly rights are earned through use. In both UK and EU law, the absence of genuine use for five years opens the door to revocation.

This changes the dynamics of trademark conflicts. A company confronting a “blocking” cloned trademark can, more often than before, consider a revocation action based on non-UK usage. Conversely, holders of historically “European” portfolios but with limited presence in the UK must accept that formal rights alone are no longer sufficient, and that a title without use becomes a legally vulnerable asset.

This evolution radically changes the litigation landscape. Companies facing a “blocking” cloned trademark will have a clearer path to pursuing a revocation action based on non-usage within the UK. On the other hand, holders of “European” portfolios with limited UK presence must accept that having formal rights alone is no longer enough to protect their trademark.

Another major consequence concerns opposition proceedings. In the UK, when the holder of an earlier trademark is required to prove use, the demonstration must be relevant to the territory in question. After the end of 2025, prior use in the EU before 2020 will no longer be capable of constituting valid evidence of use. The calculation depends on the date of filing of the contested trademark : the longer the opponent waits, the stronger, more recent, and territorially relevant their evidence must be.

Reassessing your portfolio : an operational audit, not a “cosmetic” one

Reassessing your portfolio is not about producing a formal inventory. A useful audit answers an operational question : “If a third party challenges us tomorrow, can we defend ourselves ?” This requires evaluating three key areas :

  • The list of relevant titles, particularly the UK cloned trademarks ;
  • The reality of their use in the UK ;
  • The quality of available evidence.

Proof of use is not an abstraction ; it consists of concrete documents. These should be dated, traceable, and tied to the registered trademark, relevant goods/services, and the UK territory. In many cases, the problem lies not in the total absence of use, but in the lack of well-maintained evidence : scattered proof, unarchived marketing campaigns, hard-to-retrieve invoices, and incomplete e-commerce histories. In litigation, use must be proven, not merely explained.

At this stage, the best strategy is often the simplest : implement a proof preservation process and make it sustainable. A trademark used in the UK must have an ongoing “life record” that is regularly updated. In a post-Brexit context, this discipline becomes a competitive advantage : it reduces the risk of revocation and strengthens negotiating power in conflicts.

Purely defensive refiling exposes businesses to claims of bad faith. The logic is well known : a trademark should not be used as a perpetual lock, detached from real activity. A mechanical refile, without an economic justification, can become a vulnerability rather than a protection.

On the other hand, refiling can be perfectly valid when it reflects real change : logo evolution, modernization of visual identity, adaptation of labels to a more digital offering, expansion into new product ranges, or aligning a historic portfolio with a truly used brand. After five years, it is common for rebrands to have occurred, logos to have changed, or real usage to diverge from the original form. A thoughtful filing then realigns the rights with the market.

Revoking : strategic “cleaning” from 2026 onwards

From 2026 onwards, revocation actions for non-use will particularly target UK cloned trademarks without genuine UK use. For companies seeking to launch a brand in the UK but facing “paper-based” obstacles, revocation may become the most rational option. It helps clean the register, reduce uncertainty, and limit negotiation costs against holders who are not actually exploiting the trademark.

Revocation is not just litigation. It often serves to rebalance power dynamics, open discussions, or reach a more reasonable coexistence. In cross-border cases, it can also be combined with a filing strategy to secure market entry in the UK without relying on any post-Brexit “residual risk.”

Conclusion

The December 31, 2025, deadline is not a mere formality. It transforms how trademark portfolios must be defended and utilized in the UK post-Brexit. In practice, it imposes a three-step strategy :

  • Reassess to detect vulnerabilities ;
  • Refile when economic reality justifies it ;
  • Revoke when blocking trademarks no longer have defensible UK usage.

In this type of regulatory shift, the value of strategic assistance is measured by its ability to secure assets, anticipate proof of use, and transform a legal constraint into a competitive advantage.

 

Dreyfus & Associés supports its clients in managing complex intellectual property matters by providing tailored advice and comprehensive operational support for the full protection of intellectual property rights.

Dreyfus & Associés works in partnership with a global network of specialised intellectual property lawyers.

Nathalie Dreyfus, with the support of the entire Dreyfus team.

 

Q&A

 

1. When will prior EU usage no longer protect a UK-cloned trademark ?

Starting January 1, 2026, usage in the EU prior to December 31, 2020, will no longer provide support to resist revocation for non-use of a cloned trademark.

2. Should I automatically refile cloned trademarks ?

No. Refiling should be targeted and justified. The priority is to identify critical trademarks and verify the alignment between actual usage, available evidence, and the filed form.

3. What constitutes genuine use in the UK ?

Real commercial exploitation within the UK, demonstrated by dated and coherent documents linked to the relevant products and services.

4. Can I more easily challenge cloned trademarks in 2026 ?

Often, yes, because holders will no longer be able to rely on prior EU usage and will have to demonstrate UK usage.

5. Is refiling “just to start over” risky ?

Yes. The strategy should be based on real economic rationale (brand evolution, new visual identity, product range expansion).

 

This publication aims to provide general guidance and highlight certain issues. It is not intended to apply to specific situations or constitute legal advice.