[Updated: July 2026]
The Argentine trademark system provides mechanisms to challenge registrations granted in violation of the law. Trademark nullity is an essential tool to protect the rights of legitimate holders and to ensure that trademark registrations comply with the principles of legality, good faith, and distinctiveness.
Legal Grounds for Nullity
Article 24 of Trademark Law No. 22,362 establishes the grounds on which a registered trademark may be declared null and void:
Section (a): When the registration was granted in violation of the provisions of the law.
Section (b): When the applicant knew or should have known that the mark belonged to a third party.
Section (c): When the registration was applied for commercialization purposes by a person who habitually engages in such activity.
Administrative Nullity Proceedings
Nullity actions based on Article 24, section (a), are resolved at the administrative level by the Argentine Trademark Office (TMO).
The nullities contemplated in this section refer to trademarks granted in violation of Articles 2 and 3 of the Trademark Law, which list the signs that cannot be registered as trademarks.
This procedure is governed by INPI Resolution No. 215/2026. Its most relevant aspects include:
1. Scope and Admissibility
Administrative nullity only applies to registered trademarks.
It may be initiated at the request of a party when the petitioner alleges the infringement of a subjective right or demonstrates a specific legitimate interest related to the trademark registration being challenged, or ex officio when INPI detects a serious and incurable defect in the registration process.
2. Nullity in the Context of Oppositions
When nullity is raised in the context of an opposition to a trademark application, it will be resolved within the Administrative Opposition Resolution Procedure itself.
Likewise, if grounds for nullity arise after the grounds of the opposition have been expanded or answered, the nullity claim may be filed separately within the same administrative file until the deadline for submitting final arguments.
3. Formal Requirements
A nullity petition must include:
- Information of the petitioner and the trademark owner.
- Identification of the challenged trademark.
- The subjective right or specific legitimate interest invoked.
- Factual and legal grounds, supported by evidence.
- Payment of the applicable fee.
4. Proceedings and Trademark Owner’s Defense
Once the nullity action is filed, INPI electronically reopens the trademark file and notifies the petitioner.
From that notification, the petitioner has 60 calendar days to formally notify the trademark owner that the trademark file has been reopened as a result of a nullity or cancellation for non-use action, and to submit proof of such notification to INPI.
Once proof of notification has been filed, INPI serves the action on the trademark owner, who then has 15 business days to respond and submit evidence.
If, in its response, the trademark owner introduces new facts or documentary evidence, INPI grants the petitioner a 15-business-day period to address them.
Finally, the TMO decides based on the facts, legal arguments, and evidence submitted by the parties.
5. Appeals
The administrative decision declaring or rejecting nullity may be appealed within 30 business days through a direct appeal before the Federal Civil and Commercial Court of Appeals.
Judicial Nullity Proceedings
When nullity is based on the grounds set forth in sections (b) and (c)—i.e., cases of bad-faith or speculative registrations—jurisdiction lies directly with the Federal Civil and Commercial Courts.
INPI Resolution No. 215/2026 expressly confirms that INPI has no jurisdiction over these grounds for nullity, which remain subject exclusively to judicial proceedings.
In such cases, the action must be filed directly before the courts, with sufficient evidence to prove bad faith and the violation of the legitimate holder’s rights. This lawsuit must be preceded by a mandatory mediation process.
Conclusion
Pursuing a nullity claim requires a sound evidentiary strategy and solid legal grounds, as both INPI and the courts apply a restrictive approach when assessing the admissibility of these actions. This is because a registered trademark constitutes an acquired right that, in principle, enjoys a presumption of validity.
Therefore, specialized legal advice is crucial to assess the merits of such actions, analyze the associated risks, and determine the appropriate course of action—administrative or judicial—for the protection of trademark rights.
Contact us to receive legal guidance.
