< Zurück zu den aktuellen Neuigkeiten & Events

Retail Scanner

Enforcing Your IP Rights at the Border – What’s New?

November 2021

I have a friend who is a keen model car collector. Recently he spotted one he liked the look of on a well-known online auction site, put a bid on it, and won.

He patiently waited for his model car to arrive from the US. When the package was delivered to his house a few weeks later, it arrived in an unexpected condition. The car itself was in good shape, but the box in which it was sent had clearly been opened and taped back up using UK Home Office branded tape and had on it a sticker stating Border Force had “opened and examined” the contents.

Obviously everything was in order because the package made its way to its final destination, albeit after a small detour, but this incident got us thinking about how UK customs can (and clearly are) acting to enforce IP rights, and how this has changed post-Brexit.

UK Application For Action (AFA)

Prior to 1 January 2021, the date on which the UK left the EU, IP rights holders were entitled to record details of their rights with the UK customs authorities and request that any potentially infringing or counterfeit goods entering or leaving the UK or EU market were detained and possibly destroyed. This could be done by way of a UK “Application For Action” (AFA) covering the UK only, or an EU “Application For Action” (AFA), covering the entirety of the EU.

The AFA mechanism was historically put in place by way of legislation connected to EU border enforcement. However, following the end of the Brexit transition period, any EU AFAs in place have ceased to have effect in the UK. This means that UK Border Force are no longer able to enforce an EU AFA.

Any rights holders that previously had an EU AFA in place to protect their IP rights from counterfeit goods entering the UK market will now be required to put in place a UK AFA.

Previously a UK AFA was put in place by completing the relevant EU Commission forms and sending them to the UK customs authority, known as HMRC. If a rights holder now wishes to record their IP rights and establish a new UK AFA, they must first register with HMRC and establish a “Government Gateway” account, then complete the online form.

HMRC must also be provided with information that will enable them to identify any counterfeit goods and alert the rights holder of those goods. This information can include copies of trade mark registrations, photographs of genuine goods, technical specifications of the goods or marketing materials.

Customs Enforcement

Once a UK AFA has been put in place, the UK customs authorities are able to take a number of actions against any potentially infringing goods. These include:

  • Detaining the goods for 10 working days whilst they await instructions from the rights holder or their representative. It is worth noting that this term is limited to three days in the case of perishable goods.
  • If the rights holder confirms that the goods are counterfeit, the rights holder can request that the goods are destroyed by the UK customs authority.
  • If the importer/exporter of the goods does not respond to the destruction request the goods will be automatically destroyed. If the counterfeit nature of the goods is contested by the importer/exporter, the rights holder can then bring legal proceedings.
Is it Worth it?

A growing number of retailers and wholesalers are finding their ability to enforce at the borders is more challenging following Brexit. If you are a rights holder that wants to protect against counterfeit goods coming into or out of the UK, a UK AFA can be a very effective way of enforcing your rights. Establishing a UK AFA is reasonably straightforward and cost effective and can serve as a valuable enforcement tool against infringing goods entering the UK market.

This article was prepared by HGF Trade Mark Attorney James Appleyard.

Aktuelle Neuigkeiten

HGF ist die Nummer 1 in Großbritannien für Markenportfolios im Bericht „Trade Mark Filing Trends 2025“ von Clarivate

HGF hat im neu veröffentlichten Bericht „Trade Mark Filing Trends 2025“ von Clarivate den ersten Platz für Markenportfolios in Großbritannien erreicht. Damit wird die Kanzlei als führende Kraft bei der …

Weiterlesen

Die Beschwerdekammer des EPA äußert sich zum Umfang des Ausschlusses der Sittenwidrigkeit von der Patentierbarkeit

Die jüngste Entscheidung T1553/22 der Beschwerdekammer verpflichtete die Kammer, den Umfang der Ausschlüsse von der Patentierbarkeit gemäß Artikel 53(a) EPÜ zu prüfen. Die Erfindung in diesem Fall bezog sich auf …

Weiterlesen

Prüfungserfolg bei HGF!

Wir freuen uns einmal mehr, Ihnen mitteilen zu können, dass unsere Kolleginnen und Kollegen bei ihren jüngsten Prüfungen erfolgreich waren! Ihr Engagement, ihre Ausdauer und ihr Einsatz für die berufliche …

Weiterlesen

Ist die Ablehnung des Obersten Gerichtshofs im Fall Thatcher ein schwerer Schlag für Doppelgänger?

Der Streit zwischen Thatcher’s Cider Company und Aldi Stores Limited dauert schon lange an und hat im Laufe der Zeit juristische Kontroversen ausgelöst. Am 4. Juni 2025 verweigerte der Oberste …

Weiterlesen

HGF wurde in den IP STARS Patent Rankings 2025 als eine der führenden Patentkanzleien Europas ausgezeichnet

HGF hat erneut einen deutlichen Eindruck in der aktuellen Kanzlei-Rangliste „Managing IP Stars 2025“ hinterlassen und wurde für seine Expertise im Bereich Patentrecht in mehreren Rechtsordnungen mit einer Spitzenplatzierung ausgezeichnet. …

Weiterlesen

Die Große Beschwerdekammer hat heute ihre Entscheidung in der wegweisenden Rechtssache G1/24 veröffentlicht

G1/24, der als einer der wichtigsten Fälle seit Jahrzehnten bezeichnet wird, betrifft die Frage, wie Patentansprüche von den Beschwerdekammern und damit von allen Organen des Europäischen Patentamts auszulegen sind. Die …

Weiterlesen

Die Lokalkammer Hamburg des UPC gibt Leitlinien dazu heraus, inwieweit ein Patent als eigenes „Lexikon“ verwendet werden kann

Agfa NV gegen Gucci & Anors. [UPC_CFI_278/2023] – Lokalkammer Hamburg des UPC (Klepsch, Schilling, Sarlin) – 30. April 2025 Während wir auf eine Entscheidung der Großen Beschwerdekammer des EPA in …

Weiterlesen