Skip to content 
When businesses apply for a trade mark, they often assume that the process is private. In reality, trade mark applications are designed to be transparent. Most documents filed with the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) become publicly accessible, and confidentiality is granted only in specific and limited circumstances. The framework is short but strict: section 67 of the Trade Marks Act 1994 governs what information must be made available, and rules 57 to 59 of the Trade Marks Rules 2008 set out what is visible before publication, what may be inspected afterwards, and the narrow route by which a document can be withheld. Understanding how these rules work is essential for any business that wants to protect sensitive commercial information while avoiding delays or complications during the process. Transparency matters in trade mark applications because it protects consumers, ensures accountability, prevents abuse of the system and helps the IPO make consistent and reliable decisions.
What is normally public?
Under section 67 of the Trade Marks Act 1994, trade mark files become open to inspection once the application has been published. Rule 58 requires the registrar to permit inspection of all documents filed or kept at the Office in relation to a registered mark or a published application, subject only to a short list of exceptions. In practice, this means that anyone including competitors, journalists or members of the public, can inspect the contents of the file unless one of those exceptions applies.
Once published, the following types of documents are normally visible: correspondence between the applicant and the IPO, evidence submitted to support the application, amendments or corrections, arguments made during examination, procedural documents and official letters.
The purpose of this transparency is to ensure that trade marks, which grant exclusive rights, are not hidden from the public. Competitors must be able to see what rights are being claimed so they can assess whether their own branding may conflict.
What is visible before publication?
Section 67(2) imposes a general embargo on publishing or communicating documents relating to an application before it is published, but Rule 57 prescribes exceptions. Rule 57 requires the registrar to make available for inspection the application itself, any amendments made to it, and particulars of registrable transactions such as assignments or changes in ownership. These documents relate to the basic identity and ownership of the trade mark, so they are not treated as confidential.
Can you request confidentiality?
You can, but only in specific circumstances, and the timing is critical. Rule 59 allows a person filing a document to ask that it, or a specified part of it, be treated as confidential. The request must be made now of filing, and it must give reasons. Saying that the information is “commercially sensitive” or “private” is not enough.
This principle comes from Diamond Shamrock Technologies SA’s Patent [1987] RPC 91, where Whitford J explained that “a rather more exact indication should be given as to the reasons why in truth the document ought not to be disclosed”. Acceptable reasons might include that disclosure would reveal pricing strategies, that competitors could gain insight into confidential supply arrangements, or that the information relates to negotiations which are not yet finalised.
What cannot be kept confidential?
There is no general rule protecting sales figures or advertising data. Many applicants are surprised by this, especially when they submit evidence of use to prove acquired distinctiveness. If you provide sales figures, turnover data or advertising spend, the IPO assumes that this information will be public unless you request confidentiality at the point of filing and even then, confidentiality is not guaranteed.
Evidence of use is often central to the decision. The public must be able to verify whether the applicant has genuinely used the mark in trade. Transparency ensures that exclusive rights are not granted based on undisclosed or unverifiable information.
When will a request succeed?
The registrar is more likely to agree where disclosure would genuinely harm the applicant, where the information forms no part of the decision, and where the request is properly made at the time of filing with full and detailed reasons. Diamond Shamrock is again instructive: confidentiality was allowed for royalty figures that played no part in the decision and for information supplied in confidence by a third party but refused where no real indication had been given as to why disclosure would be harmful.
If a request is refused, the IPO normally allows the filer to withdraw the document rather than force it onto the public file. This avoids accidental disclosure, but it may leave a gap in the evidence that must be filled another way.
How the IPO decides
When the IPO receives a confidentiality request, it applies a balancing test. The registrar weighs the applicant’s need to protect commercially sensitive information against what the IPO describes as the generally overriding public interest in disclosure. Confidentiality is harder to justify where the application relies heavily on evidence of use, because the public must be able to verify the claim.
In some cases, the IPO will allow confidentiality on the condition that the evidence is re‑filed in more general terms. This enables the public to understand the general level of use without revealing exact figures. Examples include turnover expressed as being “in excess of £50,000” or as “between £50,000 and £70,000”, and sales broken down by geographical area or customer type rather than by specific detail.
This approach works as a compromise. It protects the applicant’s confidential data while allowing the IPO to maintain the openness that trade mark law requires, by placing a simplified version of the information on the public file.
Practical guidance for businesses
Businesses can take several steps to manage confidentiality effectively:
• request confidentiality now of filing the sensitive document, never afterwards;
• provide summaries or banded figures instead of exact numbers where possible;
• explain the specific harm that disclosure would cause;
• avoid vague statements such as “this is sensitive information”;
• request confidentiality only where it is truly necessary;
• consider whether alternative evidence would make the point without revealing exact figures.
Conclusion
Confidentiality can be granted in trade mark applications, but only where the request is made at the right moment and supported by strong and specific reasons. Because the system is built on transparency, most documents will be public unless a justified request is made. By understanding the rules and preparing evidence with the public file in mind from the outset, businesses can protect genuinely sensitive information while still meeting the IPO’s requirements.
