UKRAINE Law and Practice Contributed by: Yaroslav Ognevyuk, AMBASSADORS
cialised administrative review body. This stage is fre- quently used to revisit examination findings, refine the scope of protection, or address objections before moving into litigation. The registration procedure in Ukraine is not merely a filing exercise. It is an early-stage dispute manage- ment process in which timing, clearance strategy, and procedural control directly affect the registrability and future enforceability of the mark. 2.4 Term, Use and Maintenance Ukrainian law provides several mechanisms to chal- lenge trade mark rights, including opposition at the application stage and post-registration invalida- tion and revocation. While the framework is broadly aligned with European models, these mechanisms function as primary tools for resolving conflicts in a highly contested register. Opposition procedures are available but remain less formalised than in many EU jurisdictions. Applicants therefore rely on opposition and subsequent invalida- tion actions, pursued either before the Appeal Cham- ber or through the courts. Invalidation is most used in cases involving conflict- ing earlier rights or bad-faith filings. Bad faith remains a recurring feature of the Ukrainian trade mark land- scape, particularly where third parties seek to secure rights ahead of foreign brand owners entering the market. Proving bad faith requires a combination of factual and circumstantial evidence, with success often depending on demonstrating a pattern of con- duct rather than a single isolated act. Revocation actions, including for non-use, are also actively deployed. The non-use period is five years, and the burden of proof lies with the trade mark owner. Failure to maintain proper evidence of use may result in loss of rights, even for otherwise commercially valu- able marks. Recent Supreme Court practice reinforces this approach by requiring proof of use in relation to specific goods or services claimed, rather than relying on general or umbrella evidence of market presence. This raises the evidentiary threshold and requires trade mark owners to structure their use and docu- mentation strategies with greater precision.
The Ukrainian system operates through a procedural interplay between administrative and judicial routes. Parties often pursue parallel or sequential challenges, using different forums to increase pressure, address evidentiary gaps, or accelerate resolution. Opposition and invalidation mechanisms in Ukraine are not merely corrective tools. They form a central part of trade mark strategy, used to clear the register, neutralise bad-faith filings, and shape the competitive landscape. 2.5 Trade Mark Rights and Limitations Registration of a trade mark in Ukraine confers the exclusive right to use the mark and to prevent third parties from using identical or confusingly similar signs in relation to identical or similar goods or ser- vices. This includes affixing the mark to goods, offer- ing and distributing products, importing, exporting, and using the mark in advertising and commercial documentation. The scope of these rights is not absolute and is shaped by a range of statutory limitations and defenc- es. Ukrainian law recognises, among others, descrip- tive and nominative use, use of one’s own name, and the exhaustion of rights principle. The exhaustion doctrine is particularly relevant in the context of parallel imports. While the legal framework formally recognises exhaustion, its practical applica- tion remains contested, and disputes frequently arise where trade mark owners seek to control distribu- tion channels in the absence of a fully harmonised approach. Parallel imports remain one of the most contested areas of trade mark law in Ukraine. Defences based on descriptive use or fair use are available but are applied narrowly. Courts tend to assess whether such use is genuinely necessary and made in good faith, rather than allowing broad reliance on these concepts. A further practical limitation arises from the require- ment to demonstrate actual use of the trade mark. Even where infringement is established, a trade mark owner may face challenges if the mark has not been used in relation to the relevant goods or services, par-
371 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook