Belarusian courts have adopted a markedly stricter posture toward intellectual property infringement claims over the past twelve months. Rights holders who have relied on older enforcement assumptions – including the view that local registration alone deters copying – are now finding that assumption challenged in practice.
Belarus has tightened its IP enforcement system through updated court practice guidelines and revised procedural rules that took effect in early 2025. International businesses holding trademarks, copyright assets, or technology rights in Belarus must review their IP registration status and litigation readiness by mid-2025 to avoid losing priority in pending or future infringement claims.
This alert explains what has changed, which business categories are most exposed, and the concrete steps international companies should take now.
What has changed and when it took effect
The Verkhovny Sud (Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus) issued revised guidance on IP dispute resolution in the first quarter of 2025. The guidance formalises a shift that lower economic courts had been applying inconsistently since late 2023.
Three developments stand out. First, courts now require rights holders to demonstrate active use of a registered mark within Belarus before granting interim injunctive relief. A trademark application or registration number alone is no longer sufficient to obtain a freeze order against an alleged infringer. Second, damages calculations in infringement claims must be supported by documented commercial loss or a licensing fee benchmark. Courts have been rejecting claims that rely solely on estimated retail value. Third, opposition proceedings against conflicting marks have been accelerated. The Natsionalny tsentr intellektualnoy sobstvennosti (National Centre of Intellectual Property, NCIP) now processes oppositions on a faster timetable, but this also means that deadlines for filing evidence have shortened significantly.
Collectively, these shifts reflect Belarus's stated alignment with Eurasian Economic Union IP harmonisation objectives. Companies that had deferred local enforcement planning should treat the first half of 2025 as the operative compliance window.
For context on parallel enforcement developments in a neighbouring CIS market, see our alert on IP enforcement developments in Russia, which covers comparable shifts in court practice across the region.
Who is affected and threshold criteria
The new court practice affects any foreign entity that holds or intends to enforce intellectual property rights in Belarus. The exposure is highest for the following categories.
- Consumer goods brands with registered trademarks that have not been put to genuine commercial use in Belarus within the past three years
- Technology and software companies whose products circulate in Belarus through resellers without a formal licensing structure
- Media and publishing groups relying on copyright protection without registered assignments or exclusive licence agreements on file
- Pharmaceutical and chemical companies with patent portfolios that have not been actively monitored against local generic competition
The active-use threshold is the most immediate risk. Under Belarusian intellectual property legislation, a trademark that has not been used in commerce for three consecutive years is vulnerable to cancellation on non-use grounds. The revised court practice has made it easier for infringers to raise non-use as a defence in infringement proceedings – effectively converting an IP infringement claim into a cancellation dispute before damages are even considered.
Companies whose Nice classification coverage in Belarus is broader than their actual product range in that market face a secondary risk: courts are scrutinising over-broad registrations more closely. An infringement claim built on a registration covering classes where the claimant has no demonstrable Belarusian activity is increasingly likely to be stayed or narrowed.
For a full assessment of your IP registration portfolio and enforcement options in Belarus, contact us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com.
Immediate actions for international companies
The compliance window is short. The following steps address the most urgent exposure points.
- Audit active-use evidence. Compile documentary proof of trademark use in Belarus – invoices, customs records, advertising materials – covering the past three years. This evidence package should be prepared before any enforcement action is filed, not after.
- Review IP registration status at the NCIP. Confirm that all trademark applications and granted registrations reflect current commercial activities. Where registrations cover unused classes, consider whether to surrender or narrow them voluntarily before a third party files a non-use cancellation.
- Assess pending opposition proceedings. If you have filed or are considering an opposition at the NCIP, the shortened evidence deadlines require immediate attention. Missing a procedural deadline in opposition proceedings results in the evidence being excluded – there is no routine extension.
- Document licensing and distribution structures. Courts now expect claimants to produce licence agreements, distribution contracts, or other instruments demonstrating that the rights holder has an organised commercial presence. Informal arrangements that have not been documented in writing carry material risk.
- Monitor technology and AI-related rights. Belarusian courts have begun encountering disputes involving software and algorithm-generated content. The existing IP legislative regime applies unevenly to these asset types. Companies with significant technology assets should obtain a targeted legal opinion on how those assets are protected under current Belarusian intellectual property legislation.
International companies with technology assets in Belarus should also review the intersection of IP and technology regulation. Our analysis of AI and technology law in Belarus provides relevant context on how digital assets and software are treated under the current regulatory system.
Engaging a lawyer in Belarus with cross-border experience is particularly important at this stage. The procedural shifts described above require local procedural knowledge combined with an understanding of how international rights holders are treated under the Eurasian IP harmonisation rules.
About Ferraz & Whitmore
Ferraz & Whitmore is an international law firm based in Lisbon, advising business clients across 46 jurisdictions, including Belarus and the broader CIS region. Our intellectual property practice supports international companies in protecting and enforcing trademark, copyright, patent, and technology rights across civil law and emerging-market systems. We assist with IP registration strategy, opposition proceedings, infringement claims, and cross-border licensing structures. The firm's CIS practice combines knowledge of local procedural rules with experience before relevant administrative bodies including the National Centre of Intellectual Property. As an international law firm advising clients on IP matters in Belarus and across 15 practice areas, Ferraz & Whitmore provides results-oriented counsel to businesses navigating enforcement changes in high-growth and complex markets. To discuss how these developments affect your IP portfolio in Belarus, contact us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com. For a full picture of our intellectual property services in Belarus, visit the dedicated service page.
Disclaimer: This publication is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information herein should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional legal counsel tailored to your specific circumstances. Ferraz & Whitmore assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this material. For advice regarding your particular situation, please contact info@ferrazwhitmore.com.