UKRAINE Law and Practice Contributed by: Yaroslav Ognevyuk, AMBASSADORS
ticularly given recent judicial approaches that require precise evidence of use for each claimed good or service. Trade mark rights in Ukraine operate within a frame- work where exclusivity is balanced by functional limitations. From an enforcement perspective, this depends on the existence of rights, their scope, their use, and their ability to withstand defences raised in increasingly sophisticated disputes. 2.6 Trade Mark Enforcement and Remedies Trade mark infringement in Ukraine generally involves the unauthorised use of identical or confusingly similar signs in relation to identical or similar goods or ser- vices. In addition to classic infringement, trade mark disputes in Ukraine frequently arise in the context of unfair competition, including misleading use, imitation of trade dress, and conduct resembling passing off. Enforcement is closely linked to illicit trade prevention and anti-counterfeiting strategies. Disputes are primarily heard in commercial courts, although certain matters may proceed in civil or administrative forums, depending on the parties and the nature of the claim. Outcomes are shaped by sub- stantive law, procedural strategy, and the ability to act quickly. Civil remedies include injunctions, damages, recovery of lost profits, and destruction of infringing goods. As in patent litigation, damages are often conservatively assessed unless supported by robust financial and market evidence. Interim measures are available but applied cautiously, requiring clear evidence of infringe- ment and a risk of irreparable harm. IP enforcement in Ukraine is characterised by the availability of customs measures. Trade mark own- ers may record their rights in the customs register, enabling border authorities to suspend the release of suspected infringing goods at the point of entry, pro- viding an effective mechanism for early intervention. Customs enforcement remains one of the most effective tools for anti-counterfeiting and illicit trade prevention in Ukraine. This impact is most evident in high-risk sectors such as consumer goods, elec-
tronics, and pharmaceuticals, where early interven- tion prevents large-scale market disruption. For many rights holders, this stage prevents infringement from escalating into a broader dispute and represents the most effective means of preventing the market entry of infringing goods. For international brand owners, customs control is often the fastest route to enforcement. It enables infringement to be addressed before counterfeit products reach distribution channels, reducing both financial losses and reputational exposure. Customs measures form a core element of any proactive IP pro- tection strategy in Ukraine. Criminal enforcement is available in cases involving large-scale or organised infringement. While less fre- quently used as a primary tool, it may serve as an effective pressure mechanism, particularly when com- bined with civil actions and customs measures. Trade mark enforcement in Ukraine is rarely confined to a single proceeding. Outcomes depend on whether enforcement is structured as a co-ordinated strategy. Approaches that treat enforcement as a sequence of isolated actions typically fail. Effective protection combines civil litigation, administrative measures, and border controls, deployed in parallel. Enforcement is not linear but co-ordinated, requiring speed, procedural control, and the ability to apply pressure across multiple fronts simultaneously. 3. Copyright 3.1 Legal Framework and Copyrightable Works Copyright protection in Ukraine is governed by a combination of national legislation, international trea- ties (including the Berne Convention and TRIPS), and ongoing alignment with EU standards, particularly in the context of digital content and platform regulation. Recent legislative developments indicate a gradual shift towards EU-style regulation, although enforce- ment remains uneven.
372 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook