Portugal’s trademark legal framework derives from the Industrial Property Code (Decree‑Law No.110/2018), fully implementing EU Trademark Directive 2015/2436, and is administered by INPI (Instituto Nacional da Propriedade Industrial) in Lisbon, covering mainland Portugal, Madeira and the Azores. As an EU member state, Portugal offers two parallel protection paths: national trademark rights limited to Portuguese territory and European Union Trade Marks covering all EU member states. Many non‑European enterprises confuse national Portuguese rules with general EU‑wide provisions, resulting in wrong strategic decisions and avoidable right losses. This article focuses on substantive legal risks and practical rules seldom mentioned in introductory materials, guiding overseas brand holders to operate trademark assets in the Portuguese market.
Registrable subject‑matter adopts the flexible “graphic representability” standard, consistent with EU harmonized rules. Protectable signs include words, logos, numerals, color combinations, product shapes, packaging configurations and sound marks. Signs without inherent distinctiveness such as purely descriptive geographical terms, common product names or laudatory slogans cannot obtain registration, unless applicants provide convincing evidence of acquired distinctiveness formed through market use within Portugal. Functional product shapes dictated by technical effects, and signs violating public policy or local moral norms shall face absolute refusal, regardless of market popularity. It is worth noting that Portugal accepts collective marks and certification marks, which are widely used by regional origin producers and industry associations for quality supervision purposes.
Portugal follows the first‑to‑file principle as the core rule, yet partial protection is reserved for prior unregistered marks under unfair‑competition law. Unregistered marks cannot initiate independent trademark infringement actions, but right‑holders may file unfair‑competition claims against confusing imitation. This remedy requires proof of established local market goodwill, which creates higher evidential thresholds compared with registered trademark enforcement. Therefore, relying purely on market use without formal registration is a high‑risk strategy for foreign brands entering Portugal.
Five‑year genuine‑use requirement constitutes the most frequent revocation ground under Portuguese trademark law. After registration takes effect, if a mark has not obtained bona‑fide commercial use within Portuguese territory for five consecutive years without justified excuses such as regulatory product approval delay or objective supply‑chain interruption, any interested third party can file revocation application before INPI. Mere symbolic use, overseas sales without domestic Portuguese circulation, or passive display on corporate websites will not satisfy statutory use obligations. Once revocation proceedings start, the burden of proof for genuine use fully rests on the trademark proprietor. Right‑holders should systematically collect local sales invoices, retail distribution records, offline promotional materials and Portuguese‑language e‑commerce operation screenshots as preserved evidence. Partial revocation for only certain designated goods or services is allowed, instead of mandatory full cancellation of the whole registration.
Regarding well‑known trademark protection, Portugal complies with Paris Convention obligations. Well‑known marks enjoy cross‑class anti‑dilution protection even without Portuguese national registration. When assessing well‑known status, INPI and Portuguese courts mainly evaluate brand awareness among Portuguese consumers, global publicity scale, sales volume, media reports and third‑party recognition facts. Competitors are prohibited from free‑riding the reputation of well‑known marks or tarnishing their distinct character on dissimilar goods and services. Foreign trademark owners may submit well‑known‑mark evidence during opposition or invalidation procedures to block conflicting later‑filed applications.
For trademark assignment and licensing, license agreements are binding between contracting parties, yet only recorded with INPI can they produce opposable effect against third parties. Unrecorded licensees have no standing to independently file trademark‑infringement lawsuits. Trademark assignment does not mandatorily require simultaneous transfer of business goodwill, which differs from several Latin‑American jurisdictions. Nevertheless, parties should submit complete assignment documents to INPI for record‑filing; unrecorded assignments cannot defend against subsequent bona‑fide third‑party acquisitions. Oral licensing arrangements are legally permitted but strongly discouraged for cross‑border enterprises, because documentary evidence will be extremely difficult to obtain once disputes emerge.
Infringement remedies combine administrative, civil and customs border measures. Right‑holders can file civil lawsuits before the specialized Portuguese Intellectual Property Court, seeking permanent injunctions, monetary damages, profit accounting and destruction of counterfeit goods. Ex‑parte preliminary injunctions are available under strict evidential prerequisites. For border enforcement, trademark proprietors shall complete rights recordation with Portuguese customs authority; customs authorities can detain suspected counterfeit goods entering or leaving all Portuguese ports and airports. Criminal sanctions apply for intentional large‑scale counterfeiting activities.
Foreign entities without domicile or registered branch in Portugal shall appoint INPI‑certified local industrial‑property representatives for all trademark‑related administrative procedures before INPI; self‑filing by overseas companies will be rejected in formal examination stage. Power‑of‑attorney documents do not require consular legalization or apostille certification, which brings convenience for international applicants. Right‑holders should distinguish national Portuguese trademark from EU Union Trade Mark: national rights only apply inside Portugal territory, while EU trademarks face revocation risk if genuine use does not occur across part of EU member states. Cross‑border brand owners shall select rational protection combinations according to actual sales coverage, and maintain continuous use evidence to cope with possible revocation challenges.
1.IPcrossark：https://www.ipcrossark.com/en/trademark.html?cid=15
2.INPI Portugal official trademark portal: https://inpi.justica.gov.pt/
3.WIPO‑WIPOLEX Industrial Property Code full text: https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/legislation/details/18804
4.ICLG Portugal Trademark Laws and Regulations 2026: https://iclg.com/practice‑areas/trade‑marks‑laws‑and‑regulations/portugal
5. Portuguese public trademark search database: https://servicosonline.inpi.pt/pesquisas/main/marcas.jsp
