The Intellectual Property Court: A Guide for Foreign Rights Holders

Reading time: 5 min

Category tag:
Practice Analysis

Byline:
By Elizaveta Razina

May 2026

INSIGHTS ARTICLES — ip court russia foreign rights holders

The Intellectual Property Court (Суд по интеллектуальным правам — IP Court) is Russia's specialised federal court for intellectual property disputes. It was established in 2013 and occupies a unique position in the Russian judicial hierarchy: it is both a first-instance court (for certain categories of IP dispute) and a cassation court (for IP decisions from the arbitrazh courts). For a foreign rights holder navigating a Russian IP enforcement problem, understanding the IP Court's jurisdiction and its procedural features is essential for planning the litigation strategy.

The IP Court's First-Instance Jurisdiction

The IP Court is the first-instance court for: disputes concerning the granting, protection, and termination of legal protection for IP rights (including challenges to Rospatent decisions on trademark registration, opposition, and cancellation); disputes concerning the use of IP in competition (including challenges on unfair competition grounds related to IP); and appeals against decisions of the Chamber for Patent Disputes (Палата по патентным спорам) of Rospatent.

Practically, for a foreign rights holder, the IP Court's first-instance jurisdiction covers: non-use cancellation actions under Article 1486 of the Civil Code; bad-faith registration invalidity actions under Article 1512; opposition proceedings against pending Rospatent applications; and appeals against adverse Rospatent decisions in examination or opposition proceedings.

The IP Court does not have first-instance jurisdiction over civil infringement claims — a claim for damages from trademark infringement goes to the general arbitrazh courts, not the IP Court. However, the IP Court is the cassation court for IP decisions from the arbitrazh courts, meaning that a disputed IP matter may eventually reach the IP Court on appeal from a lower court infringement decision.

Procedural Features

The IP Court has specialist judges with dedicated IP expertise — a significant advantage compared to the general arbitrazh courts, where IP matters are heard alongside an undifferentiated commercial caseload. The specialist composition means that the quality of IP legal analysis in IP Court decisions is generally higher than in first-instance arbitrazh court decisions.

IP Court proceedings are structured as written proceedings with oral argument. The court actively questions the parties' legal representatives, and the quality of the written submissions is critical to the outcome. Foreign rights holders without Russian legal representation are not prohibited from appearing, but the practical barriers — language, procedural knowledge, and the need to comply with Russian submission requirements — make Russian counsel a necessity rather than an option.

The Timeline

First-instance IP Court proceedings typically take six to twelve months from the filing of the application to a first-instance decision, assuming the proceedings are not complex and the respondent files a substantive defence. Complex proceedings — involving substantial documentary evidence or expert evidence on market recognition — may take longer.

The IP Court's first-instance decision can be appealed to the IP Court's own Presidium (which acts as the appeal instance for IP Court first-instance decisions), adding approximately six months. Cassation from the Presidium lies to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on questions of law. The full cycle from first-instance application to Supreme Court cassation is typically two to three years for a contested case.

Coordinating IP Court and Civil Proceedings

For a foreign rights holder pursuing both a cancellation of a squatter's registration and a claim for compensation for infringement that occurred before the cancellation, coordination between the IP Court and the arbitrazh court proceedings is important. The arbitrazh court infringement claim may be stayed pending the outcome of the IP Court's decision on the validity of the registration, since the existence of a valid registration is a precondition for the infringement claim. Conversely, the IP Court's decision that the registration is invalid may assist the infringement claim but does not automatically determine it.

The strategy for coordinating these parallel tracks — including the timing of the IP Court application relative to the arbitrazh court infringement claim — is a material part of the case planning for any matter involving both a validity challenge and an infringement claim.