CMS Expert Guide on Preliminary Injunctions in IP in Ukraine

Any IP claim can be subject to PIs. However, a PI cannot be identical to the essence of the claim, unless the dispute is being resolved on the merits.

No. The application for a PI is applied without notifying other parties in the case and is considered by the court within tight deadlines with the specific purpose of imposing PI before the opposing party (on which the PI is imposed) has the opportunity to artificially avoid it. 

An application for PIs may be filed both before the filing of the claim on the merits as well as at any stage of the proceedings. While there is no specific deadline for filing a PI application within an already open proceeding, when the PI application is submitted before filing of the claim on the merits, the latter shall be filed within 10 calendar days from the date of the decision granting the PI.

The court is to consider the application within 2 days upon its submission. The ruling on granting the PI shall be enforced immediately.

Generally, no. Although a decision granting a PI may be appealed this does not suspend its execution or prevent further proceedings. At the same time an appeal against a decision to cancel the PI or to replace one type of security with another suspends the enforcement of such decision.

There are no specific types of evidence but a party claiming a PI shall substantiate that failure to take such measures may significantly complicate or make it impossible to enforce potential court decision in its favor or to effectively defend or restore the violated or disputed rights or interests of the claimant, for the protection of which they referred or intend to refer to the court. The court may also summon the person who filed the application for PI to provide explanations or additional evidence confirming the need for a PI, or to clarify issues related to countervailing security.

Yes, as identified in our comments to para 2 above. However, in exceptional cases, when the explanations and evidence provided by the applicant (after having been summoned pursuant to the procedure referred to in para 6 above) are insufficient to consider the application for PI, the court may order its consideration in a court hearing with the parties summoned.

Yes, the costs related to filing for a PI can be recovered, however only (i) after the final decision on the merits in the case, in which a PI has been ordered, is issued and only (ii) if the court satisfies the claims on the merits (fully or partially). 

Yes, when filing for a PI the party claiming it may suggest possible means of security that they can provide, a security may also be requested from such party by court at court’s own discretion.

Yes, a decision granting/denying a PI may be appealed (both in appeal and cassation instances). This does not suspend execution of a PI or prevent further proceedings. It is also possible to request the court which issued a PI to cancel its decision (if the underlying circumstances changed).

The proceeding to challenge the PI usually take approximately 2 months (in appeal proceedings) and approximately 3 months (in cassation proceedings).

A PI becomes effective immediately upon the adoption of the decision granting it.

PIs are subject to general enforcement mechanisms. A decision on PIs is an enforcement document and is subject to immediate execution from the date of its issuance, regardless of its appeal and the opening of enforcement proceedings. A copy of the decision shall be immediately sent to the applicant, to all persons affected by the PI and whom the court may identify, and shall be sent by the court for immediate execution to state and other authorities for taking appropriate measures. 

Yes, it is possible to recover damages caused by PI by filing a respective claim to court.

Yes, in order to grant a final PI, the case shall be considered by court on the merits (it can also be agreed upon by the parties’ / granted within alternative dispute resolution proceedings). However, as indicated in comments in para 1 above, a PI cannot be identical to the essence of the claim.