Trademark protection: the practice of Kazakhstan and the European Union

This article is devoted to a comparative legal analysis of trademark protection mechanisms in the Republic of Kazakhstan and the European Union. The relevance of the study is обусловлена the increasing number of infringements of exclusive rights in both jurisdictions, as well as the ongoing convergence of regional legal systems within the framework of the EAEU and their harmonization with international standards. The purpose of the study is to identify common approaches and key differences in enforcement practice and to formulate recommendations for improving Kazakhstani legislation, taking into account the experience of the EU. The methodological framework comprises comparative legal analysis, examination of judicial practice, and statistics. The article reviews key cases from Kazakhstan and precedents of the Court of Justice of the EU. Kazakhstan’s system effectively combats counterfeiting, while EU practice is more focused on protecting brand reputation and preventing actions that may undermine brand prestige; therefore, to incorporate European experience into Kazakhstan’s legislation, following measures are proposed: amend Article 43 of the Law on Trademarks, Service Marks, Geographical Indications and Appellations of Origin to include brand reputation protection; establish a procedure for the prompt removal of unlawful digital content; and strengthen pre-trial dispute resolution by developing mediation mechanisms.

1. Trademarks. URL: https://www.wipo.int/en/web/trademarks#:~:text=A%20trademark%20is%20a%20sign,can%20I%20protect%20my%20trademark%3F (accessed: 09.02.2026). (In English)

2. Zakon Respubliki Kazahstan ot 26 ijulja 1999 goda No. 456 «O tovarnyh znakah, znakah obsluzhivanija, geograficheskih ukazanijah i naimenovanijah mest proishozhdenija tovarov». URL: https://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/Z990000456_ (data obrashhenija: 20.01.2025). (In Russian)

3. Reglament (ES) 2017/1001 Evropejskogo Parlamenta i soveta ot 14 ijunja 2017 g. o tovarnom znake Evropejskogo sojuza. URL: https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/ru/legislation/details/18298 (data obrashhenija: 25.01.2025). (In Russian)

4. Castaldi C. (2018) To trademark or not to trademark: The case of the creative and cultural industries // Research Policy. Vol. 47. No. 3. P. 606–616. (In English)

5. Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1989/104/oj/eng (accessed: 09.01.2025). (In English)

6. Prilozhenie No. 26 k Dogovoru o EAJeS. URL: https://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_163855/bd226dd95ecfd44a5e4398f10520b0ba963d05d5/ (data obrashhenija: 20.01.2025). (In Russian)

7. Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (recast). URL: Directive 2015/2436 EN EUR-Lex (accessed: 09.01.2025). (In English)

8. Zyl Ch., Ferdinand J., Garlantezec S.Ch. EUIPO trade mark filings 2023-2024: Key insights and trends. URL: https://www.marks-clerk.com/insights/articles/euipo-trade-mark-filings-2023-2024-key-insights-and-trends/ (accessed: 11.01.2025). (In English)

9. Informacija o prodelannoj rabote territorial’nymi organami justicii za 2025 god. URL: https://www.gov.kz/memleket/entities/adilet-kis/documents/details/970931?lang=ru (data obrashhenija: 16.04.2026). (In Russian)

10. Apelljacionnyj sovet, politika marketplejsov i rassmatrivaemye dela: Minjust o zashhite prava intellektual’noj sobstvennosti. URL: https://primeminister.kz/ru/news/reviews/apellyatsionnyy-sovet-politikamarketpleysov-i-rassmatrivaemye-dela-minyust-o-zashchite-prava-intellektualnoy-sobstvennosti-29041 (data obrashhenija: 31.01.2025). (In Russian)

11. Heymann L.A. (2012) The scope of trademark law in the age of the Brand persona // Va. L. Rev. Brief. Vol. 98. P. 61. (In English)

12. Skoko H. Theory and practice of parallel imports: the New Zealand case. 1994. URL: https://www.academia.edu/2160193/THEORY_AND_PRACTICE_OF_PARALLEL_IMPORTS_THE_NEW_ZEALAND_CASE (accessed: 16.04.2026). (In English)

13. Nezakonnoe ispol’zovanie tovarnogo znaka. URL: https://almaty.sud.kz/rus/news/nezakonnoeispolzovanie-tovarnogo-znaka-1 (data obrashhenija: 15.04.2026). (In Russian)

14. Policy document MEB 14. Parallel importation: marketing authorisation and maintenance. 5 August 2025. 40 p. URL: https://english.cbg-meb.nl/site/binaries/site-content/collections/documents/2023/01/01/meb14-parallel-import-authorisation-and-maintenance/MEB+14-250805-Parallelimport+Handelsvergunning+en+onderhoud+EN.pdf (accessed: 16.04.2026). (In English)

15. Silhouette International Schmied GmbH & Co. KG v. Hartlauer Handelsgesellschaft mbH (C-355/96, 1998). URL: https://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?num=C-355/96 (accessed: 19.01.2025). (In English)

16. Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 July 2011. Viking Gas A/S v Kosan Gas A/S. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/GA/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62010CJ0046 (accessed: 21.01.2025). (In English)

17. Merck, Sharp & Dohme GmbH v. Paranova Pharmazeutika Handels GmbH (C-443/99, 2002). URL: https://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?language=en&T,F&num=C-443/99 (accessed: 21.01.2025). (In English)

18. Judgment of the Court of 4 November 1997. Parfums Christian Dior SA and Parfums Christian Dior BV v Evora BV. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=ecli%3AECLI%3AEU%3AC%3A1997%3A517 (accessed: 21.02.2026). (In English)

19. Aaker D.A. (2010) Building Strong Brands. London. P. 19–20. (In English)

20. Epstein R.A. (1985) Why Restrain Alienation? // Columbia Law Review. No. 970. P. 970–990. (In English)

21. Rose-Ackerman S. (1985) Inalienability and the Theory of Property Rights // Columbia Law Review. No. 932. P. 931–969. (In English)