You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

August 24, 2015

Cambodia’s Trademark Registration Procedures

Subscribe to Updates
Informed Counsel

The Madrid Protocol entered into force in Cambodia on June 5, 2015. Consequently, trademark protection can now be obtained through national and international channels. While the Department of Intellectual Property Rights (DIPR) plans to issue new regulations on the Madrid System’s registration procedures—and so the procedures may be subject to change—there has been no official announcement to date. Therefore, this article discusses Cambodia’s current trademark registration procedures to help foreign applicants effectively manage their trademark portfolios.

Formal Examination

After a trademark application is filed, the World Intellectual Property Organization will conduct a formal examination to assess whether all of the necessary documents have been included in the application. For national applications, an examination will normally be conducted within 30 days from the filing date. For international applications designated for Cambodia, however, an examination will not be carried out.

Documents that are often incomplete or missing include the original notarized power of attorney and the certified copy of a trademark application in another country in the case that a priority registration under the Paris Convention is claimed. If documents are incomplete or missing, the DIPR’s registrar usually makes an informal request for the complete or missing documents to be submitted through local agents without specifying a deadline.

If the request is not complied with and the attempts of the DIPR’s registrar to follow up with the local agents are unsuccessful, the registrar issues a Notice of Formal Examination with a compliance deadline of 45 days from the date of receipt. A failure to comply by the deadline or request an extension for a further 45 days from the granting date will cause the application to be deemed as withdrawn. An Acknowledgement of Filing Instruction will be issued when the documents are complete.

Substantive Examination

A substantive examination of the trademark application will then be conducted on absolute and relative grounds, and either a conditional acceptance or rejection may be issued. In the case of conditional acceptance, the registrar usually requests a disclaimer for nondistinctive elements. The applicant can either submit the disclaimer or a modification of the disclaimer by deleting any nondistinctive elements to allow the applied-for trademark to become registrable.

Rejections are normally based on absolute rather than relative grounds. Use and registrations of the same mark in Cambodia and/or other countries are considered to determine whether a trademark is registrable. Modifying a mark by adding a distinctive element is helpful to overcome rejection.

The rejection or conditional acceptance that results from the substantive examination stage must be complied with or contended within 60 days from the receiving date. An extension of 60 days from the granting date is available. In Cambodia, an extension may be requested several times without providing a reason.

If a mark is registrable, a Notice of Acceptance of Mark Registration will be issued. A registration fee must be paid within 60 days from the issuing date—otherwise, the mark will be rejected. A Certificate of Registration will be issued after the payment of the registration fee. It is usually issued within six to ten months after the filing date. The protection lasts for ten years from the filing date and is renewable for an additional ten years each time. An application to renew a mark’s registration can be made within six months before the registration expires and a grace period of six months is allowed.

Publication

Trademark registrations are published by the DIPR. A Notice of Opposition accompanied by supporting evidence can be filed within 90 days from the date of publication. To rebut the opposition, the registrant needs to file a counterstatement accompanied by supporting evidence within 90 days from the receiving date of the Notice of Opposition. Opposition proceedings in Cambodia are uncommon in part because it is difficult for the public to obtain the country’s Trademark Journal. However, the Trademark Journal can now be obtained from the DIPR’s website, and so this may change.

Renewal

To renew a registration, an affidavit of use/non-use must be filed every fifth to sixth year from the registration or renewal date. The Division of International Registration of Marks of Cambodia has the duty to remind applicants of the use or non-use of marks, and this process will still apply to international trademark registrations after the new regulations come into effect. If an affidavit of use/non-use is not filed, the registered mark will be removed from the register. In practice, however, Cambodia’s registrars have never removed a registered mark from the register.

Under the new regulations, filing will be mandatory at the time of renewal if a mark is not recorded at the fifth to sixth year. Even so, it is highly recommended to file an affidavit of non-use in time, as this can eliminate the risk of facing a non-use cancellation action. Owners of national and international registrations should closely observe the deadline to secure their marks.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 13, 2026
When Decree No. 186/2026/ND-CP (Decree 186) takes effect on July 15, 2026, it will introduce the most significant reform of Vietnam’s administrative IP enforcement framework since Decree 99/2013/ND-CP was issued in 2013. These changes are expected to make administrative enforcement faster, more accessible, and better suited to the realities of modern IP disputes. Below are the principal reforms and their practical implications for rights holders and enforcement practitioners. The End of Notarization and Consular Legalization Among the most welcome procedural changes is the abolition of the notarization and consular legalization requirement for powers of attorney (POA) submitted in administrative enforcement proceedings. Under the previous regime, foreign rights holders were generally required to execute a POA, then have it notarized and consular legalized (if seeking customs recordal). In practice, this process frequently delayed enforcement by four to eight weeks, often long enough for infringing goods to disappear before authorities could intervene. Decree 186 removes this bottleneck, now requiring only an original or certified copy of the POA. If the document is in a foreign language, a Vietnamese translation is sufficient, provided it is certified by a competent authority or confirmed by the authorized Vietnamese IP representative. Consular legalization and notarization are no longer required. For rights holders, the practical impact is substantial. Administrative enforcement files that previously took weeks to prepare can now be completed in a matter of days, allowing much faster responses in time-sensitive matters such as warehouse raids, border interventions, and trade-fair enforcement. The decree also introduces a useful administrative simplification. Where an original POA has already been submitted to the same enforcement authority and remains valid, applicants may rely on a copy of that earlier submission by identifying the previous case file. This eliminates unnecessary duplication for rights holders pursuing multiple enforcement actions before the same
Read More
July 9, 2026
Recycling, upcycling, and refill-packaging models are now widely promoted as ways to reduce waste, lower carbon emissions, and respond to consumer demand for sustainable products. However, complications arise when these environmentally driven trends intersect with intellectual property law—particularly where reused or altered packaging continues to display third parties’ registered trademarks. Adding to this complexity, Thailand’s draft Sustainable Packaging Management Act aims to introduce new environmental compliance obligations that businesses must navigate alongside existing trademark concerns. Recycling and upcycling packaging may infringe trademark rights, especially in cases not protected by the first-sale doctrine—the principle that a trademark owner’s rights over a particular mark-bearing product end once the owner first sells it. Furthermore, even refill packaging carries legal risk due to specific statutory prohibitions under Thai law. Compounding these challenges, the draft Sustainable Packaging Management Act will impose extended producer responsibility (EPR) obligations on manufacturers and brand owners, requiring them to manage packaging throughout its lifecycle. These overlapping legal frameworks could deter manufacturers from pursuing ESG-aligned business models unless businesses understand how to navigate both trademark and environmental requirements. Under Thai law, this issue remains uncertain because the Trademark Act does not expressly codify the first sale doctrine, also known as the exhaustion of trademark rights. Generally, this doctrine provides that once a trademark owner has lawfully sold goods bearing its trademark, the owner’s right to control further resale of those particular goods is exhausted. The rationale is that the owner has already received commercial benefit from the first authorized sale; therefore, the purchaser should be free to resell or otherwise dispose of the goods. Although the doctrine is not expressly codified in the Trademark Act, Thai courts have recognized it in relation to genuine goods and parallel imports, as seen in a Supreme Court Judgment No. 2817/2543 in which the
Read More
July 6, 2026
Indonesia’s regulation on reporting online intellectual property (IP) infringement provides comprehensive procedural guidance for IP rights holders and their licensees in reporting online infringement complaints. Issued in December 2025 by the Ministry of Law as Regulation No. 47 of 2025 regarding Handling of Intellectual Property Infringement Reports in Electronic Systems, this regulation covers all types of IP rights. It also specifies documentation when reporting infringement, and lays out the procedures for examination, verification, and enforcement actions. Submission of Complaints Complainants may submit reports through the online system of the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) or in person at the DGIP office. Complaints may also be filed through an authorized proxy. Under the regulation, complainants are required to provide the following information and documents: Personal details of the complainant; Brief description of the protected work or subject matter (i.e., type of IP and name or address of the infringing website, portal, account, or application, or a link to the location of the infringing content); Complete description of the alleged infringement; Certificate of registration or recordal of the relevant IP; Recordal of IP license agreement, if any; and Other supporting evidence. Verification and Examination Process Upon receiving a complaint, the responsible formality officer may request clarification or additional supporting documents. In the latter case, the complainant must then submit the necessary administrative documents within 14 days of the notification date. Once the documentation is deemed complete and sufficient, the case will be formally registered. Subsequently, the DGIP will establish a verification team to handle online IP violations, which will include the Civil Servant Investigator (PPNS), the Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs, experts with relevant expertise in IP, and representatives from related associations such as AVISI (Indonesian Video Streaming Association). After examining the report, the team will prepare the Minutes
Read More
June 30, 2026
Customs recordation is an enforcement mechanism in Myanmar that enables intellectual property (IP) rights holders to seek prevention of the cross-border movement of infringing goods. The enactment of Myanmar’s IP laws in 2019 has enabled customs recordation for registered marks and copyrights under the Trademark Law 2019 and the Copyright Law 2019. By contrast, the Patent Law 2019 and the Industrial Design Law 2019 do not provide a practical framework for customs recordation, and accordingly such rights are not subject to the customs recordation regime. Under the Trademark Law 2019, rights holders may apply for customs recordation and may also ask the Customs Department to suspend the release of goods suspected of bearing counterfeit marks. Likewise, the Copyright Law 2019 allows for customs intervention in relation to pirated works. These provisions reflect Myanmar’s gradual alignment with international standards on border measures, although the implementation framework remains at a relatively early stage of development. Customs Recordation Pursuant to the Trademark Law 2019 and the Copyright Law 2019, the relevant authorities have issued customs rules concerning the protection of registered marks and copyrights. In practice, the process generally begins with the submission of an application to the Customs Department together with supporting documentation. This typically includes proof of registration in Myanmar; details of the rights holder, applicant, and any authorized representative; and a comprehensive description of the genuine goods. Product identification materials—such as photographs, packaging samples, and distinguishing features—are particularly important in helping customs officers identify suspected infringing goods. A recordation remains valid for two years from the date of approval. It may be renewed for additional two-year terms, provided that the renewal application is filed within the thirty days prior to expiry for marks and up to thirty days in advance of the expiry date for copyrights, in accordance with
Read More