Decision of the Supreme Court of Appeals 11. HD 2009/13331 E. 2011/5967 K. dated 16/05/2011 "The claim made by the plaintiff by the defendant company on the grounds of the trademark" PIOZON "for the application made by the plaintiff to the Turkish Patent Institute for the registration of the trademark" PLIAZON "was rejected by the Turkish Patent Institute Re-examination and Evaluation Board on the grounds that the visual and audio similarity It was rejected. The plaintiff has restricted itself to oncology medicines in his trademark registration application. The defendant's trademark is registered in the 5th, 16th and 35th commodity and service classes and the 5th commodity class consists of medicines and chemical products for human and animal health. In this case, consideration should be given to the fact that medicines are used under the supervision of doctors and pharmacists when the likelihood of contact between the trademark of the parties is assessed. As a matter of fact, the plaintiff's trademark will be used for oncology medicine, and it will be removed without prescription and pharmacist supervision. This issue has been examined by two separate expert committees during the trial and has been determined by comprehensive and timely open reports where there is no possibility of complaint between doctors and pharmacists in relation to the trademarks of the parties. In this case, it should be concluded that there is no possibility of filing the trademark between the parties. "