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

Cookies Settings

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

Mehmet Gün and Uğur Aktekin discuss four decades of change in Türkiye’s legal market, the firm’s commitment to independence and the challenge of building an institution that can outlast its founders
Boehringer Ingelheim has instructed a team from Kirkland, while Teva is being represented by Pinsent Masons
The Delhi High Court’s latest directions offer an opportunity to move beyond remedies against bad-faith registrations and address how suspicious applications are identified in the first place, says Fatima Baig at Lexlinc
Camilla Hamrin describes how the acquisition by Acapo Onsagers will impact Bergenstråhle’s trademark practice – and reflects on changes she has seen over 30 years in IP
On a recent trip to the French capital, we learned that the UPC is squeezing domestic litigation while firms are chasing senior talent, experimenting with AI and considering new ways of organising their practices
Daniel Law says a string of lateral hires and broader expansion plans will strengthen its position to capitalise on Brazil’s burgeoning IP and patent litigation market
Jason Raeburn’s arrival will expand the firm’s London footprint in AI, copyright and tech disputes
The firm is shaping its AI strategy around partnerships with Harvey and Legora alongside internally developed tools from its legal technology company, Eltemate
A dispute Down Under shows why trademark lawyers cannot afford to wait on the sidelines when a rival brand gathers momentum
The Third Circuit’s decision in Thomson Reuters v ROSS marks the first appellate-level decision addressing AI and fair use, prompting copyright counsel to consider arguments around potential licensing markets
Gift this article