Trademark Infringement at Customs: 600 Counterfeit Keychains Seized | Istanbul 1st IP Court 2026/168
A trademark holder obtained a customs stoppage order, triggering the seizure of 600 counterfeit branded keychains at customs. Parallel criminal proceedings were opened; the civil action before Istanbul 1st IP Court sought a finding of infringement, injunction, and forfeiture.
Customs enforcement is one of the most cost-effective first lines of defence for registered trademark holders. A rights holder enrolled in a customs protection programme can have infringing goods stopped at the border before they reach consumers. Istanbul 1st IP Court's case 2026/168 illustrates how a customs interception translates into civil and criminal proceedings.
Facts
The plaintiff held multiple registered trademarks and had coordinated with Turkish customs authorities. Acting on a customs stoppage order issued at the plaintiff's request, customs officers examined a bonded warehouse declaration and discovered 600 counterfeit branded keychains. Expert examination confirmed the goods were unauthorised counterfeits — produced without the rights holder's knowledge, at low quality, and potentially harmful to consumer health. The public prosecutor's office opened a criminal investigation; a criminal court ordered seizure of the counterfeits, and the goods were placed under customs custody.
Civil Proceedings
In parallel with the criminal investigation, the trademark owner filed a civil action before Istanbul 1st IP Court seeking: a finding of trademark infringement (IPC Art. 29); an injunction against further infringing acts (IPC Art. 149/1-a and 149/1-c); forfeiture and destruction of all counterfeit goods and promotional materials (IPC Art. 149/1-d); and costs.
Strategic Significance of Parallel Proceedings
This case illustrates a three-layer enforcement strategy: (1) customs recordal — proactive registration of the mark with customs authorities so border officers can act without waiting for a court order; (2) criminal proceedings — a public prosecutor's investigation under IPC Arts. 30–31, producing seizure orders; (3) civil action — seeking damages, injunction, and forfeiture before the IP court. Evidence flows between all three tracks: the customs expert report and seizure order became evidence in the civil case.
Takeaway
Trademark holders active in import-heavy product categories should enrol their marks in Turkey's customs protection programme (Gümrük Koruma Programı) at TÜRKPATENT. The combination of a pre-registered border alert and rapid parallel civil and criminal responses maximises deterrence and simplifies proof — as this case shows, the customs record effectively builds the plaintiff's evidence file before the civil action even begins.
Istanbul 1st Court of Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights, Case: 2026/114, Decision: 2026/168, Date: 25.06.2026
Party names and trademark details are omitted for confidentiality.