Italian courts have quietly but consequentially shifted how they handle intellectual property disputes. Specialised sezioni specializzate in materia di impresa (specialist enterprise divisions) have adopted stricter standards for granting interim injunctions and a more demanding approach to establishing likelihood of confusion in trademark disputes. For international businesses that rely on Italian registrations or distribute products through Italian channels, these shifts carry direct compliance and litigation risk.
Italy's IP enforcement environment changed materially through court practice developments that took effect progressively across 2024 and consolidated in early 2025. The specialist enterprise divisions now require rights-holders to demonstrate genuine use of a registered mark more rigorously before an infringement claim will proceed. Companies with pending trademark applications, active opposition proceedings, or existing IP registrations in Italy should audit their portfolios and enforcement posture before the end of Q1 2026.
This alert explains which businesses are most exposed, sets out the threshold criteria that trigger each category of risk, and provides five immediate actions for international rights-holders operating in Italy.
What has changed and when it took effect
Italy's intellectual property legislation has long required genuine use of a registered mark as a condition for maintaining enforcement rights. Courts previously applied this standard with some flexibility, accepting partial or residual commercial activity as sufficient proof. That tolerance has narrowed considerably.
The specialist enterprise divisions – sitting in Milan, Rome, Turin, and Bologna – have aligned their evidentiary threshold with the stricter interpretation promoted at EU level. From mid-2024 onward, decisions from these courts consistently require concrete, documented proof of use in the specific Nice classification categories under which a mark is registered. Nominal use, promotional materials alone, or use confined to a parent company outside Italy no longer satisfies the threshold in a significant share of contested cases.
A parallel shift concerns interim relief. Italian intellectual property legislation has always allowed rights-holders to seek misure cautelari (interim protective measures), including injunctions and seizure orders, on an urgent basis. Courts now scrutinise the fumus boni juris (appearance of legal merit) requirement more carefully. Applicants must present a clear infringement claim supported by evidence of active use and demonstrable harm. Bare assertions of registration and infringement – without documented market presence – are increasingly insufficient to obtain interim relief on a first application.
On the opposition side, the Ufficio Italiano Brevetti e Marchi (Italian Patent and Trademark Office, UIBM) has tightened its handling of opposition proceedings filed on the basis of earlier rights. Procedural deadlines within opposition proceedings are now enforced with less margin for extension. Additionally. The evidentiary burden on the opposing party. particularly where the earlier right is registered but not recently used. has increased in line with EUIPO practice.
Who is affected and what the threshold criteria are
The developments described above affect a broad range of international businesses. The following categories face the most direct exposure.
Brand owners with Italian registrations older than five years are the most immediately at risk. Under Italian intellectual property legislation, a mark becomes vulnerable to cancellation on non-use grounds after five years of non-genuine use. With courts and the UIBM now applying this standard strictly. Any rights-holder who cannot document genuine commercial activity in Italy within the relevant Nice classification categories may find their registration challenged. or their infringement claim dismissed. before the substantive dispute is resolved.
Companies relying on EU trade marks for Italian enforcement face a related risk. An EU trade mark covers Italy as a member state. However, genuine use must be demonstrated across an area corresponding to the EU as a whole. Alternatively. At least in a member state of sufficient commercial significance. Practitioners before the specialist enterprise divisions note that Italian courts are increasingly sceptical of enforcement actions brought by EU trade mark holders whose commercial activity in Italy is thin or undocumented.
Businesses in the fashion, design, luxury goods, and technology sectors – where imitation and parallel trade are common – are particularly exposed to the tightened interim relief standard. These sectors generate the highest volume of infringement claims before the specialist enterprise divisions, and the stricter fumus boni juris scrutiny directly affects the speed and cost of obtaining injunctive protection.
Companies with pending trademark applications in Italy or active IP registration processes before the UIBM should also take note. The tightened opposition proceedings timeline means that a failure to respond promptly – or to file evidence of use within the required period – can result in loss of rights without further recourse.
The threshold criteria that determine whether your business is within scope are:
- You hold an Italian or EU trade mark registered for more than five years with limited documented Italian commercial activity.
- You have filed or are defending opposition proceedings before the UIBM in the past 24 months.
- You are currently pursuing or anticipating an infringement claim before an Italian specialist enterprise division.
- Your Italian distribution relies on exclusivity arrangements enforced through IP rights rather than contractual protections alone.
For tailored legal advice on how these developments affect your IP portfolio in Italy, contact us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com.
Immediate actions for international rights-holders
The following five steps address the most pressing compliance and strategic risks arising from these shifts.
First, conduct a genuine-use audit of all Italian and EU trade marks. For each registration, compile documentation of Italian commercial use: invoices, sales data, marketing materials bearing the mark, distribution agreements, and customs records. The audit should cover the five-year period immediately preceding today's date. Gaps in documentation are potential vulnerabilities in both defensive and offensive IP proceedings.
Second, review pending and imminent opposition proceedings. If you have filed or received an opposition before the UIBM, confirm all procedural deadlines immediately. The reduced extension margins mean that a missed filing date in opposition proceedings can now be fatal to the opposition without appeal. Engaging a lawyer in Italy with experience in UIBM practice is advisable at this stage rather than after a deadline has passed.
Third, reassess your interim relief strategy before filing. If you are considering an application for misure cautelari before a specialist enterprise division. Prepare the evidence package before filing rather than supplementing it after the first hearing. Courts now expect applicants to come fully prepared. An application without documented Italian market presence and clear harm evidence is likely to be denied – delaying protection and alerting the infringer.
Fourth, consider whether your Nice classification categories remain accurate. If your business has evolved since the original IP registration, goods or services may now fall outside the registered classification categories. Enforcement of a mark in a category where genuine use cannot be demonstrated is difficult. Extending or updating registrations to reflect current commercial activity is preferable to discovering the gap during contested proceedings.
Fifth, evaluate the interaction between Italian IP enforcement and AI-generated content or digital distribution channels. The specialist enterprise divisions are beginning to address infringement claims involving AI-generated imagery and digital platform distribution. Companies operating at the intersection of IP and technology in Italy should consult our overview of AI and technology law in Italy alongside this alert. As the procedural and evidentiary standards are developing rapidly in that sub-sector.
For a preliminary review of your IP enforcement posture in Italy, email us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com.
About Ferraz & Whitmore
Ferraz & Whitmore is an international law firm based in Lisbon, advising clients across 46 jurisdictions on intellectual property protection, IP registration strategy, trademark application procedures, and infringement claim management. Our IP practice combines Portuguese civil law expertise with English common law tradition to deliver cross-border IP solutions in markets including Italy, Germany, and across the EU. For international businesses that need a law firm in Italy and across Europe for IP enforcement, trademark opposition proceedings, and Nice classification strategy, our team works with technology companies, brand owners, and institutional investors. The firm's IP practice has experience before both national courts and the EUIPO, including opposition and cancellation proceedings. To discuss your IP enforcement situation in Italy, contact us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com.
Disclaimer: This publication is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information herein should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional legal counsel tailored to your specific circumstances. Ferraz & Whitmore assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this material. For advice regarding your particular situation, please contact info@ferrazwhitmore.com.
Author: Sophie Kellner
Author title: Partner, IP & Technology Law
Published: February 05, 2026
Also see our full service coverage: intellectual property law in Italy and comparative developments in our IP enforcement alert for Portugal.