Latest news

Always up to date

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

Our Patent Attorney Olga Vahatova participated in Baltic Brand Forum, held Riga (Latvia) in the new cultural and entertainment center Hanzas Perons on 3 October 2019.

Olga highly appreciated the impressed presentations of the great speakers, the bright discussions led my excellent moderators and awarding ceremony for the most significant brands of three Baltic states. Olga hopes Baltic Brand Forum to become the remarkable tradition for marketing and advertising professionals and wishes success to its oranizers and participants.

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

On July 19, the Decree of the Cabinet of Ministers of July 12 on increasing official fees for actions related to the protection of intellectual property rights came into force in Ukraine.

The official fees for patents of invention and design increased two times, for utility models three times. Maintenance of patents has also become more expensive. For example, before the official fee for maintaining the validity of a patent began at 300 UAH and reached a maximum of 3 800 UAH after fifteen years, while now the minimum annuity fee amounts to 600 UAH (the first and the second year). Starting from the 21st and ending with the 25th year, the annuity fee is 30 400 UAH.

The increase of the official fee for registration of trademarks is four times. The same amount is payable for each additional class. However, in case of electronic filing of an application the discount of 20% shall be applied.

For more information and new schedule of charges for trademark, design and patent matters please contact: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

To continue the topic on trademarks after dissolution of a company in Latvia, it is proposed to consider the practical case concerning the Latvian trademark No. M 45 949 Latgales alus.

The trademark was registered on 20 May 2000.[1]

On 20 August 2013 the trademark assignment from its owner, a New Zealand company Mirtex Global Corporation Limited (hereinafter - Mirtex), to Alexander D., a natural person from Daugavpils (LV) was registered.[2] The ground for the trademark assignment registration was a Deed of Assignment dated 9 July 2013.

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

The implementation of Moneyval recommendations this year resulted in the liquidation of risky companies. In the first weeks of 2019, the number of liquidated companies exceeded 7000, which is not only more than a year before, but even more than several years together. In the beginning of this year, the Register of Enterprises made the automated removal of non-active companies from the Commercial Register.[1] While the procedure provides publication of an announcement about the suspension of company activity and an invitation to appoint a liquidator, only a few companies applied for “normal” managed liquidation.

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

Administrative liability for violation of intellectual property rights is regulated by the Latvian Administrative Violations Code (hereinafter – LAPK, from Latvian - Latvijas Administratīvo pārkāpumu kodekss). The LAPK contains only four provisions that provide for administrative liability for violation of intellectual property rights, including Articles 166.14 and 166.17. Both provisions concern administrative violations in the area of ​​consumers’ rights protection. The administrative violation specified in Article 166.14 of the LAPK is the offering or sale of counterfeit goods. Article 166.17 of the LAPK describes the administrative violation as the use of a trademark, other distinctive marks for goods and services, or designs, the counterfeiting of the mark, the use or distribution of a counterfeit mark. These are blanket rules and applicable in conjunction with special laws in the field of intellectual property. The law does not provide a definition of "counterfeit goods". The explanation of the term is also not provided by the Law on Trademarks. In the article, the author studies the Latvian laws in conjunction with European Union and international regulation and case law in order to find out the explanation of the term “counterfeit goods” in the meaning of the Latvian Administrative Violations Code.

(in Latvian; English translation to follow)


P.O. Box 17, Riga LV-1069, Latvia
Phone:  +371 2992 2129