Cease-and-desist ignored, counterfeits still selling? How a claim in the economic court works — interim measures, the similarity expertise, and what you can actually recover.
A household-chemicals maker in Fergana sent a textbook cease-and-desist letter: certificate attached, demands itemised, 30-day deadline. The infringer never replied — and never stopped. Pallets carrying the copied mark kept leaving his warehouse to wholesalers across the valley. By the time the case reached court, what mattered was not the polish of the statement of claim but a single motion filed on day one alongside it: seize the unsold stock at the warehouse. The court granted the seizure, and three thousand counterfeit units froze exactly where they could be counted and shown. Without that seizure the warehouse would have stood empty by the main hearing — and half the evidence would have evaporated with the goods. In a trademark fight the winner is rarely the party with more rights on paper. It is the one who immobilised the goods first.
It is tempting to picture a trademark suit as revenge: "we'll punish whoever stole our brand." In practice the economic court does not punish — administrative and criminal channels exist for that. A civil claim does something else: it returns control over how your mark is used and clears counterfeits off the market. It is a set of demands, not a single blow.
Court makes sense once a cease-and-desist letter has failed — the infringer stayed silent, refused, or agreed on paper and carried on. Keep two different conflicts apart. If you are defending your own registered mark against a copyist, that is an infringement claim and it goes to the economic court. If someone registered your brand first and is now waving a certificate, your job is to kill that registration — and that runs first through the Appeals Board at the IP Center, then a court. What follows concerns the first scenario: the mark is yours, the infringer is the outsider.
The legal ground is simple and needs no invented article numbers: using an identical or confusingly similar sign for homogeneous goods without the rights holder's consent infringes the exclusive right under the Law "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin". The exclusive right runs for 10 years from the application date, is confirmed by the entry in the State Register, and the certificate is the foundation of the whole claim.
A strong claim is a list of specific demands, not a single "stop infringing". On a rights holder's claim, the economic court can:
Here it pays to be honest rather than sell an illusion. Money is the weakest part of a trademark claim, precisely because losses are hard to quantify and harder still to tie causally to the infringer's goods. Verify the exact menu and method of calculating monetary demands against the current wording of the Law "On Trademarks" and economic-court practice as at the filing date — do not mechanically import rules from neighbouring jurisdictions. So in most cases the centre of gravity sits with the non-monetary demands: prohibition, seizure, destruction. They are enforceable, tangible, and hit the infringer's economics harder than a contested damages figure — he is left holding stock he cannot sell.
This is the most underrated tool and, at the same time, the one that most often decides the outcome. Months pass between filing and the judgment on the merits — long enough for the infringer to sell off the batch, move it out of the warehouse, or transfer the business to another entity. Interim measures close that gap.
On the claimant's motion, the court may, for the duration of the case:
The motion for interim relief is filed together with the claim, and sometimes before it. The court weighs how real the threat is that without the measure the judgment cannot be enforced, and may require justification — and in some cases counter-security. So the motion is not one line saying "please seize"; it is a reasoned document tied to the fixed evidence: here is the stock, here is where it sits, here is why it will be gone tomorrow.
A practical rule: if the infringer is an active seller with a physical warehouse or live listings, interim measures are prepared at the same time as the claim, not "when needed". They will always be needed, and almost always sooner than expected.
If the marks are identical down to the pixel, the dispute is easy. In practice the infringer almost always introduces differences: a new font, a flipped element, an added word, a shifted colour. The whole case then turns on one question: are the signs confusingly similar for homogeneous goods? That is a question of fact, and it is settled not by the judge's eye but by an expert opinion.
Similarity is assessed as a whole — by sound, by graphics, by meaning — through the eyes of an average consumer of the relevant goods. The opinion can come from a court-appointed expertise or from a specialist engaged by a party (a patent attorney, a signs expert). A strong position is not "it looks similar to us" but a structured opinion that works through each criterion and is backed by the fact that the goods fall within homogeneous positions in your certificate's list.
The homogeneity of goods is the other half of the same question. A mark protects not everything in general, but the specific NICE classes and positions listed at registration. If the infringer operates in an adjacent niche, the dispute shifts to "are the goods homogeneous" — and again arguments win, not emotion. Which is why expert preparation of the case matters more than fine rhetoric in the courtroom.
By the time you file, the evidence must already be gathered — it cannot be reconstructed after the fact. What works in the economic court:
Sequence is critical: evidence is fixed before the infringer learns of the cease-and-desist. The moment he realises he is being pursued, he has a motive to remove the traces. We work through the fixing sequence in detail in the piece on the cease-and-desist letter — for a lawsuit it is exactly the same, only the stakes are higher.
A real calculator for a typical infringement case:
Typical first-instance budget: 20–55 million UZS.
On timing: 30 days for a reply to the cease-and-desist, then filing and acceptance for proceedings. The first instance hears the case within a few months; an ordered expertise adds 1–2 months. Realistically, from filing to a first-instance judgment — 4–6 months. Appeal and cassation up the economic ladder — another 6–10 months, if the infringer goes the distance. Then enforcement: once the judgment takes effect a writ of execution issues, and the enforcement authorities handle collection. The full cycle from first cease-and-desist to actual enforcement — about a year, sometimes more.
Weigh that against the alternative of doing nothing: a year of counterfeits on the market erodes brand recognition more than the whole process costs. Interim measures from day one cut that damage — the goods sit still while the dispute runs.
A lawsuit isn't always optimal, and sometimes works faster paired with other channels:
And it almost always pays to keep the door to settlement open: many cases end with the infringer — having seen the goods seized and the expert opinion — agreeing to stop and to cover costs without reaching judgment. A well-prepared claim is valuable not only for winning in court but for making settlement attractive to the other side.
We run infringement disputes from fixing the evidence and the cease-and-desist through to enforcement, and before any dispute we check the strength of the trademark registration itself — because a claim begins not with the statement of claim but with how solid your position is.
Can I file straight away, skipping the cease-and-desist?
For a range of economic disputes the pre-trial step is mandatory, and without a cease-and-desist the claim is left without consideration. Even where it is not formally required, the letter is almost always sent: it is both an attempt to settle and proof of good faith. Check whether it is mandatory for your category of dispute as at the filing date.
Which matters more — the statement of claim or interim measures?
A well-drafted statement of claim is essential, but it is the interim measures that often decide whether there is anything left to recover by the end. If the goods are sold off, a paper win is hollow. So seizure of the goods is prepared at the same time as the claim, not later.
How much money can you really recover from an infringer?
The law gives a right to recover damages, but the amount must be proven, and that is the hardest part of the dispute. Beyond money, the court can prohibit use, seize and destroy counterfeits at the infringer's expense, and order publication. Check the exact menu and size of demands against the current wording of the Law "On Trademarks".
Who proves the similarity of the marks?
The burden is on the claimant. Confusing similarity and the homogeneity of goods are confirmed by an expert opinion — a court-appointed expertise or the opinion of an engaged specialist. "By eye" assertions do not persuade the court.
What if the infringer hides the goods or re-registers the company?
That is exactly what interim measures are for: seizure of the goods and a ban on dealing with them are filed as early as possible. If the business is transferred to another entity, where affiliation is proven and the infringement continues, the demands can be addressed to the new seller.
How long does it take from filing to money?
First instance — 4–6 months, plus 1–2 months for an expertise. Appeal and cassation against a stubborn infringer — another 6–10 months. With enforcement, the full cycle usually fits within a little over a year.
Can I run an infringement suit and a challenge to someone's registration at once?
Yes, and sometimes you must: if the infringer responds by registering a similar mark, that registration is attacked through the Appeals Board in parallel with the infringement claim. They are two separate proceedings, but their strategy is shared.
A trademark lawsuit looks like the finale — in reality it is the continuation of work begun long before the statement of claim. The outcome turns on whether you fixed the evidence before spooking the infringer, whether you immobilised the goods with interim measures on the very first day, and how firmly the expertise confirms the similarity. A solid registration, gathered evidence, and a seized batch turn a claim from a lottery into a manageable procedure with a predictable result. A weak position filed in anger does the opposite — it hands the infringer time and teaches him how to defend himself.