Applicants enjoy continued success in Russian IP disputes

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Applicants enjoy continued success in Russian IP disputes

Sponsored by

gorodissky-400px.png
wu-yi-bfrk9rcohre-unsplash.jpg

Vladimir Biriulin of Gorodissky & Partners looks at why IP owners in Russia are increasingly satisfied with the outcome of disputes

IP owners would have often asked in the past if foreign and domestic businesses were equally treated in courts. In Russia, it is difficult to fathom why this ques tion sprang up once every few months because Russian courts have never differentiated between domestic participants and aliens.

In the meantime, courts were steadily gaining experience in adjudicating IP cases, though nevertheless, sometimes questions were raised in respect of the quality of the judgments.

Now, it seems that the hurdle has been overcome. Courts have accumulated vast experience in examining IP cases, and enforcement of IP is done by the local courts of the first and second instances, as well as by a specialised IP court.

The Supreme Court has recently aired a report showing that most disputes involving IP are solved in favour of IP owners. In common courts, the rate is about 80% in favour of IP owners (in 2020: 618 cases and 462 positive judgments – 75%). The respondents in these disputes are owners of pirate sites and infringers of copyright. The high rate may be explained by the fact that the infringers of this kind in many cases do not take seriously their misdemeanour with the result that the courts hand down most strict judgments against them.

In commercial courts, the rate of victories is even more impressive – in 2020: 22352 cases with 18185 positive judgments – 81%. This is even though that infringing legal persons are more qualified, they understand what they do, infringe knowingly (in most cases) and may engage experienced lawyers to counter attacks of the IP owner.

The general picture of enforcement of rights is more than satisfactory. It also implies that there are obvious advantages to register one’s intellectual property. This will save a lot of effort and money in a possible dispute.

It is worth mentioning that not only damages, direct and circumstantial, may be recovered but also a so called compensation. This is a viable alternative to damages. Damages should be meticulously documented and submitted to court. Compensation does not need to be proved, just claimed. Although it can be argued that the amount of compensation may not seem sufficient in some cases. The maximum amount may be somewhere between $60,000 and $70,000 depending on the rate of exchange but it may be claimed hands down. If it is not, sufficient proof of damage is welcome.

Below are given some court statistics showing the winning rate of applicants in IP disputes in 2020:

  • Appeals against Rospatent decisions: 47 cases examined; 33 satisfied.

  • Enforcement of IP rights: 22970 cases examined; 18647 satisfied.

The bottom line is that it is worthwhile to protect one’s IP rights.

 

Vladimir Biriulin


Partner, Gorodissky & Partners

E: biriulinv@gorodissky.ru

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Erise IP has added a seven-practitioner trademark team from Hovey Williams, signalling its intention to help clients at all stages of development
News of prison sentences for ex-Samsung executives for trade secrets violation and an opposition filed by Taylor Swift were also among the top talking points
A multijurisdictional claim filed by InterDigital and a new spin-off firm in Germany were also among the top talking points
Duarte Lima, MD of Spruson & Ferguson’s Asia practice, says practitioners must adapt to process changes within IP systems, as well as be mindful of the implications of tech on their practices
Practitioners say the UK Supreme Court’s decision could boost the attractiveness of the UK for AI companies
New awards, including US ‘Firm of the Year’ and Latin America ‘Firm to Watch’, are among more than 90 prizes that will recognise firms and practitioners
DWF helped client Dairy UK secure a major victory at the UK Supreme Court
Hepworth Browne led Emotional Perception AI to victory at the UK Supreme Court, which rejected a previous appellate decision that said an AI network was not patentable
James Hill, general counsel at Norwich City FC, reveals how he balances fan engagement with brand enforcement, and when he calls on IP firms for advice
In the second of a two-part article, Gabrielle Faure-André and Stéphanie Garçon at Santarelli unpick EPO, UPC and French case law to assess the importance of clinical development timelines in inventive step analyses
Gift this article