Challenging a trademark in Uzbekistan: the Apellation Council route

A Tashkent apparel maker built a capsule collection for three years — first on marketplaces, then through a Chilanzar showroom, hitting 4 billion UZS in annual turnover by late 2025. In March 2026 a demand letter dropped into their inbox from a sole proprietor in Samarkand: "remove our trademark from your packaging — we registered it in NICE class 25 last February." Certificate attached. The Samarkand party had indeed filed at the IP Center four months earlier than the original owner, who had never bothered registering — "we already have the brand on the market, who's going to take it from us?" Replying to the demand letter is pointless: the register is on the registrant's side. The only defence is to take down the certificate itself. You cannot go straight to the economic court — the Apellation Council at the IP Center has to be cleared first, and how the file is prepared for that step decides the entire dispute.

What the Apellation Council does

The Apellation Council is an administrative collegial body operating under the Intellectual Property Center at the Ministry of Justice. It handles three categories of cases:

• Appeals by applicants against examiner refusal decisions — the "your own appeal" track, when your mark was knocked back.
• Third-party objections against subsisting registrations — trademarks, patents, industrial designs. This is the route for taking down someone else's mark.
• Objections against renewal, assignment, and licence decisions.

The Council sits as a three-member panel: a chair-lawyer and two examiners from the relevant subject area. Decisions go by simple majority, are issued in writing, and are delivered to the parties within 10 working days of the hearing. A Council decision is an administrative act with immediate effect — if the objection is upheld, the IP Center amends the register without any further step.

The point to grasp early: the Council is not a court. It does not assess damages, award compensation, or enjoin use of the mark — it decides the fate of the registration only. All money claims and injunctions against use run in parallel before the economic court. But without a Council win, the court is almost useless — the registrant walks in with the certificate and the presumption of validity.

Grounds: what the objection must rest on

The Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan on Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin splits cancellation grounds into two groups. An objection has to lock onto one or more of them — "the mark should never have been registered" is not a ground the Council can work with.

Absolute grounds (apply regardless of anyone else's rights):

• No distinctive character — the sign is descriptive, generic, or built entirely of industry-standard terms. Example: a "Cotton Fabric" mark in NICE 24.
• Signs that describe kind, quality, quantity, property, purpose, value, time or place of production of the goods — the mark literally describes the goods.
• Misleading the public about the goods, the producer, or the place of origin. Example: a French-flag motif on goods made in Andijan.
• Conflict with public interest, morality, state symbols.
• Identity with a geographical indication or appellation of origin.

Relative grounds (protect specific people's rights):

• Identity or confusing similarity with an earlier-registered mark for similar goods.
• Identity or similarity with an earlier-filed application of an earlier priority.
• Use without consent of a well-known mark (even without registration in Uzbekistan — if the mark is well-known or in fact known in this territory).
• Registration in the name of an agent or representative of the rights holder without that holder's consent (the "Trump-style" registration — a textbook bad-faith pattern that the law specifically names).
• Registration in breach of third-party copyright, name of a known personality, or a trade name with an earlier date.

Since the 2018 reform, bad-faith registration is also a standalone ground (an application filed to grab someone else's brand, resell it, or extort the original user). Proving bad faith is hard — you have to show the applicant knew about your brand and filed with intent to harm or extract unjust benefit. But in the textbook situation, where a sole proprietor word-for-word copies a marketplace brand from another city, bad faith is built into the picture — and the Council sees it.

Time limits: how long the window stays open

This block is the most under-priced one. Registrants often bank on you missing it.

• Absolute grounds. An objection can be filed at any time while the mark is in force. No deadline.
• Relative grounds, general regime (earlier identity / similarity, trade name, copyright). The default window is five years from publication of the registration in the IP Center's official bulletin. Miss the five years and the ground is dead, even if you are clearly right on the merits.
• Bad-faith registration and well-known marks. No deadline. The legislator carved this exception out deliberately to protect users whose rights were stamped on tactically.

Detail: the five-year window runs from publication, not from registration. There is usually a 4–8 week gap between those two dates. Pull the bulletin before deciding "in time or not."

When your case is close to the boundary, frame the objection on cumulative grounds — one relative, one absolute (say, descriptiveness), one bad-faith. If the relative ground dies on the clock, the others keep going.

Cost and timeline

Real numbers for a textbook case:

• State fee for filing an objection with the Apellation Council: roughly 1,500,000–3,000,000 UZS depending on the type of objection and number of classes. Exact figures sit on the current IP Center fee schedule, which is revised annually.
• Drafting the objection with full evidence package by counsel: 8,000,000–18,000,000 UZS.
• Evidence base (notarised website inspections, consumer surveys, marketing-presence reports, accounting extracts): 5,000,000–15,000,000 UZS.
• Representation at the hearing: included in counsel's scope, plus an oral-advocacy fee of 2,000,000–4,000,000 UZS.
• If the registrant is a foreign party and you are attacking an agent's "Trump" filing: apostilles, translations, legalised powers of attorney — add another 3,000,000–7,000,000 UZS.

Typical total budget: 18–45 million UZS.

On timing, the Council reviews an objection within four months of filing. In practice the first hearing is set 2.5–3.5 months out and the decision is delivered another 2–3 weeks later. From filing the objection to register entries being changed: usually 4–5 months. If the registrant files for an adjournment (a standard delay tactic), add another month.

Compare with the alternative: a direct suit at the economic court without first running the Council is not even admitted. A damages claim built on top of an existing Council decision adds another 4–6 months. End-to-end picture — about a year from the first demand letter to a monetary judgment.

Evidence that works: your own use as an asset

The cornerstone of any objection on relative grounds and bad faith is documented use of the mark by you before the registrant's priority date. The Council does not take your word for it — it looks at the file:

• Screenshots of company pages on Instagram, Telegram, Yandex.Market, Uzum Market — with dates and URLs, notarised through a web-page inspection.
• Contracts with label, packaging, and advertising suppliers — dated earlier than the registrant's priority.
• Accounting documents: revenue extracts for goods sold under the mark, invoices, delivery notes.
• Card-terminal receipts and acquirer reports tied to the product line.
• Influencer agreements, ad placements, press mentions.
• Domain registration and hosting history of the site.
• Trade-name registration of the legal entity or sole proprietor using the mark.

The package has to tell a timeline: the mark surfaced with you on date X, remained in continuous commerce between X and the registrant's priority date Y, and had recognisability by date Y. If there is a six-month break inside that window, close it with circumstantial evidence (showroom lease, warehouse stock-takes, supplier correspondence).

If the mark was not in active use — the position is shaky. The weight then shifts onto absolute grounds (descriptiveness, generic-ness) or onto the "well-known mark" ground, which has its own evidence requirements.

What happens at the hearing

The Council hearing is oral, open to the parties and their representatives. The procedure:

• The chair announces the panel, sets out the parties' rights, and asks about recusals.
• The objection and the evidence package are read into the record.
• The registrant (or their representative) puts their defence and may file counter-evidence — proof of their own use, registration history.
• The two sides put questions to each other and trade replies.
• The panel asks its own questions — typically targeted at the soft spots on both sides.
• Closing statements.
• The panel retires, returns 10–30 minutes later with the oral operative part. The reasoned written decision follows within 10 working days.

Hearing tactics are a separate skill. A good advocate does not run the schedule "read the objection out loud" — they run the schedule "answer the three key questions the panel will ask." Those questions are predictable: was there real use, is there documentary proof of priority, what is the degree of similarity? Pre-loading a short, sharp, numerical answer to each gives you the edge.

If the Council refuses: appealing to the economic court

A Council decision is appealable to the Economic Court of Tashkent within 3 months of receiving the written reasons. The court hears the case under economic-procedure rules: new evidence is admissible but it has to relate to facts that existed at the time of the Council hearing. You cannot fundamentally swap your grounds — the subject of the dispute is fixed.

First-instance review takes 4–6 months. Appeal and cassation on the standard economic vertical add another 6–10 months. The full appeal cycle, all instances: 12–24 months from filing the objection at the Council to a final cassation judgment.

Strategically: if the economics of the case allow it, file the objection and start drafting the court complaint in parallel. The Council rarely reviews its own decisions on the merits, but the court takes the case fresh and sometimes sees what the panel missed.

First 30 days: what to do when the demand letter lands

Practical checklist when a registrant comes after you with a certificate over your de-facto brand:

• Days 0–3. Do not respond to the demand on the merits. Confirm receipt, ask for seven working days "to review." Pull the complete file on the mark — application, prosecution history, classes, publication date — via the IP Center paid database or a trademark agent.
• Days 3–10. Collect internal use records from the last 3–5 years. Order notarised inspections of every online presence. Commission a legal opinion on the odds of cancellation.
• Days 10–20. Prepare and file the objection at the Apellation Council, together with a motion to stay any infringement suit the registrant may have already commenced.
• Days 20–30. In parallel, file your own application for the mark — knowing it will be suspended. The application fixes your priority as of the dispute date and works as additional good-faith evidence.
• In parallel. If the registrant has begun blast take-down requests to marketplaces and hosting providers over your content, send each platform a written notice of the pending administrative dispute with proof of the objection filing. Most platforms will pause take-down execution until the dispute is resolved.

If these steps are done in the first month, the odds of holding the brand sit at 70–80%. Drop a quarter and the odds halve — evidence ages, the registrant locks in.

FAQ

Who has standing to file an objection at the Apellation Council?

Any interested party — natural or legal person, resident or non-resident. Interest is shown through actual use of the sign, an earlier application or registration, or a demand having been served by the registrant. Foreign parties must be represented by an accredited Uzbek trademark agent.

Can an objection be filed anonymously?

No. The objecting party's identity is disclosed to the registrant. Anonymous submissions are not heard. In delicate situations — for example, fear of a retaliatory suit — the standard tactic is filing through a subsidiary or affiliated company.

What happens to my sales under the disputed mark while the Council deliberates?

Filing the objection does not suspend the registration. The registrant can formally continue infringement actions. Courts will usually take note of an administrative dispute already on the books and stay the case until the Council decides. Active sales continue at the party's risk: if the Council refuses, you may face damages.

Is settlement possible at the Council stage?

Yes. The Council welcomes settlements. The standard settlement: the registrant voluntarily cancels their mark or narrows the goods list, the objecting party drops the dispute, and the two sides sign a coexistence-and-conduct agreement. Settlement value in a textbook case sits at 10–50 million UZS, depending on the brand's value.

Can the state fee be refunded if the objection succeeds?

No. The fee is non-refundable regardless of outcome. On a win you can partly load it onto the registrant through a follow-on damages claim — but that is a separate court case.

What if the registrant assigns the mark to a third party mid-proceedings?

Recording the assignment requires the IP Center to register the transfer document. The Center usually pauses transfer registration when the mark is the subject of a Council dispute. If the transfer slips through, the objection continues against the new owner as universal successor. If the cancellation is granted, it operates retroactively — the buyer is left without the mark, and any settlement with the seller is a private matter between them.

Is filing an objection the start of the conflict or its end?

Often it is the lever that forces a settlement. The registrant runs the numbers on the likely Council ruling and comes to the table. That is why most objections settle before the first hearing. Build a quality file — not so it reaches a decision, but so the other side reads it before the Council does.

Registering someone else's brand in Uzbekistan often looks like a tactical move without consequence — the register is on the registrant's side, the aggrieved party is dazed, the demand letter arrives bundled with a threat of suit. The Apellation Council exists precisely so that move does not work automatically. A decision lands in four months, rides on the evidence picture rather than rhetorical flair, and a well-built file takes the registration down with minimal court load. The rule: the first call after the demand letter is not to the registrant — it is to a trademark lawyer who can assess the windows and put the file together. A month late costs you the brand. On time, you recover it for half the price of the marketing campaign you would otherwise have to relaunch.