Ukraine has taken another significant step towards harmonising its intellectual property legislation with European Union standards by introducing a new draft trade mark law. Rather than merely updating the existing legislation, the draft proposes a comprehensive reform of the trade mark registration system, implementing Ukraine’s obligations under the EU – Ukraine Association Agreement, in line with Directive (EU) 2015/2436 and the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 on the European Union Trade Mark.

A key change proposed in the draft law is the complete restructuring of the trade mark examination and post-registration dispute resolution system. If adopted, the reform would fundamentally change how trade marks are examined, registered, and challenged in Ukraine.

A faster examination process

Unlike the current system, where examination of both absolute and relative grounds may significantly delay registration, the draft introduces a streamlined procedure focused primarily on formal requirements and absolute grounds for refusal, reducing the time required to obtain trade mark protection.

According to the explanatory materials presented by the Ukrainian IP Office (IPO) during recent discussions on the new draft law, the proposed examination timeline would be approximately up to one month for the formal examination, and up to two additional months for examination on absolute grounds.

Accordingly, straightforward applications could proceed to registration within approximately three months, representing a substantial reduction compared with the current registration timeframe.

The draft law also allows partial registration, meaning that where absolute grounds affect only part of the specification, protection may still be granted for the remaining goods and services instead of refusing the application in its entirety.

Relative grounds move from the examination stage to the opposition stage

The reform fundamentally changes the role of the IPO in assessing conflicts with earlier rights. Under the current legislation, the IPO examines trade mark applications on both absolute and relative grounds, conducting ex officio searches for earlier conflicting trade marks.

The draft largely abandons this approach. Instead, the IPO will now primarily examine applications against absolute grounds for refusal, while conflicts with earlier trade marks will be resolved through the opposition proceedings initiated by the owners of earlier rights. This brings Ukraine considerably closer to the EUIPO model, where owners of earlier rights are expected to actively enforce their prior rights.

Early publication and automatic notifications

To compensate for the reduced role of ex officio examination, the draft law introduces several new conflict-detection mechanisms. It provides that, once the application satisfies the minimum filing requirements during formal examination, it will be entered into the Trade Mark Database. According to the implementation model presented by the Ukrainian IPO, application data will be published within three working days of the application receipt, even before confirmation of the filing fee payment, thereby enabling earlier monitoring by prior rights owners.

In addition, the IPO will automatically send electronic notifications to owners of earlier Ukrainian trade mark registrations where newly filed applications appear identical or similar according to an automated similarity assessment. Importantly, these notifications are purely informational and do not constitute an official assessment of likelihood of confusion, create no legal presumptions or suspend any procedural deadlines.

The right to file an opposition is not limited to recipients of such notifications, as any interested party entitled to rely on earlier rights may initiate opposition proceedings within the prescribed statutory period.

The draft law also allows interested parties to request an official trade mark search report covering national applications and registrations, international registrations designating Ukraine and, following Ukraine's accession to the EU, European Union trade marks.

Introduction of a genuine opposition system

One of the most important novelties is the introduction of a comprehensive administrative opposition procedure. Rather than preventing registration during substantive examination, owners of earlier rights will be able to challenge registrations within three months from publication of the registration by filing an opposition based on relative grounds.

Unlike the current system, where the registered trade mark can be challenged only before the court, these disputes will be resolved administratively before the IPO, avoiding immediate court proceedings. The draft law also introduces separate administrative procedures for declarations of invalidity and revocation, including cancellation for non-use, genericide, and deceptive use.

To prevent bad-faith or abusive disputes, the draft law introduces a cost-allocation mechanism. The losing party in administrative proceedings, including oppositions, revocations, and invalidations, will be required to reimburse the winning party for official fees and reasonable legal fees.

The reform therefore creates a multi-layered administrative enforcement system broadly comparable to the system administered by the EUIPO.

Registration first, certainty later

An important practical consequence of the new model is that a trade mark registration will no longer be immune to post-grant challenges. During the three-month opposition period, the registration remains vulnerable to cancellation based on earlier rights, which the IPO describes as a period of legal uncertainty. Nevertheless, this still represents a significant improvement over the current system, where uncertainty regarding relative grounds may continue throughout the considerably longer examination process, often lasting well over a year.

Under the draft law, a registration cannot be relied upon for certain purposes until the opposition period expires or any filed opposition proceedings are fully concluded. Restricted actions include:

• Obtaining a second-level .UA domain name;
• Recording the trade mark with the Customs IP Register; or
• Obtaining a final court judgment in trade mark infringement proceedings.

Greater emphasis on actual use

The draft law further aligns Ukrainian practice with the EU by strengthening the role of genuine trade mark use and codifying the doctrines of acquiescence and non-use as important defences available to proprietors of later trade marks. In particular, proprietors of earlier marks may be required to demonstrate genuine use of their registrations before relying on them in opposition or invalidity proceedings, while a proprietor who has knowingly tolerated the use of a later trade mark for five consecutive years may, in principle, lose the right to seek its invalidation.

While commenting on the draft law, the IPO has stated that the five-year period relevant for assessing genuine use will commence only after the expiry of the opposition period or, where an opposition has been filed, once the decision on the merits of opposition becomes final.

Non-traditional trade marks

The draft law expressly recognises numerous non-traditional trade marks, including:

• Sound marks;
• Position marks;
• Pattern marks;
• Motion marks;
• Hologram marks;
• Multimedia marks; and
• Colour marks and combinations of colours without contours.

A comprehensive legal framework for certification and collective trade marks is also introduced in the draft. Certification marks are intended to distinguish goods or services that have been certified by the proprietor as to their material, method of manufacture, quality or other characteristics. Unlike ordinary trade mark owners, the proprietor of a certification mark must not carry on business involving the certified goods or services, but instead act as an independent certifying body. Certification marks will also be governed by publicly available regulations specifying the conditions of use, certification criteria and supervision mechanisms.

A collective mark may be used by members of the association in accordance with the governing rules of use, allowing them to identify their goods or services as originating from members of the same organisation while preserving individual commercial identities. Like certification marks, collective marks are subject to dedicated rules on registration, use, amendment of regulations and revocation.

Digitalisation and modernisation of proceedings

Beyond substantive changes, the draft law introduces a fully digital administrative framework. Applications and administrative proceedings will primarily be conducted electronically. This digital framework includes the use of electronic case files, the electronic service of documents, and the automated generation of registry extracts and trade mark certificates. The IPO also plans to establish an open trade mark database with automated notification services and enhanced interoperability with other public registers.

Looking ahead

The proposed legislation represents far more than a technical revision of Ukraine's trade mark law. It fundamentally changes the philosophy of trade mark registration by replacing a predominantly examination-based system with a modern European model built around faster registration, early publication, digital monitoring and post-publication opposition procedures.

For trade mark owners, the reform will place greater emphasis on proactive portfolio management. Trade mark watching, appointing local representatives, preserving evidence of genuine use, and reacting promptly during the three-month opposition period, will become increasingly important. At the same time, applicants should benefit from significantly faster registration, earlier commercial exploitation of their brands and a more predictable examination process.

The proposed law remains at the public consultation stage and does not yet constitute an official legislative bill introduced before the Ukrainian Parliament. The draft may be amended following consultations with stakeholders, and neither its final text upon submission nor the timeline for parliamentary debate has been finalised.

We will closely follow further developments and keep our clients informed of any significant changes throughout the legislative process.