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

Monetisation is standing at the forefront of patent development, and one firm says AI is increasingly being deployed
Data centres are being built across the US, prompting patent disputes, but Texas’s thriving tech industry and patent-ready courts make the state particularly ‘ripe’ for litigation
Carpmaels & Ransford is set to bolster its UK attorney team with the appointment of Simmons & Simmons’s head of IP in the UK
Updates on Nokia’s licensing strides and a surge in patent activity around battery recycling in Australia were also among the top talking points
To mark International Day Against Child Labour, Matteo Amerio at Corsearch says the people inside businesses who can identify counterfeiting risks must be given the tools and authority to act
With genuine equity at IP firms becoming rarer, securing partnership is harder than ever, but increased transparency is also making climbing the ladder more predictable
Yossi Sivan explains how Israeli judgment is a pro-brand owner departure from the norm and why it sends a strong message that corporate structures are not always a shield
Halim Shehadeh, group CEO of IP firm CWB, says that in the rush to discuss what AI can do, IP firms are overlooking the more important question of whether they are ready
Caitlin Heard, who formally joined the firm from CMS last month, says she is excited by the ‘energy’ of the London office
Ranjna Mehta-Dutt, who moved to Chadha & Chadha after 25 years at Remfry & Sagar, says the firm plans to expand its life sciences practice through targeted recruitment and dedicated teams for bigger clients
Gift this article