A case from our practice

A Polish company applied to register the word mark «MAAG PROFILE» in Ukraine for class 20. The examiner found online a company, MAAG Polska, that uses this sign and concluded that consumers would be misled as to the producer. We removed the objection with a letter of consent — and this note shows how exactly the Ukrainian office wants such a document filed.

The case in brief

• Sign: the word mark «MAAG PROFILE» in standard characters; Ukrainian application No. m202315966 of 31 August 2023;
• Applicant: a Polish company related to MAAG Polska;
• Specification: Nice class 20, 362 items: furniture, including workbenches, furniture edging and profiles for making and assembling furniture;
• Outcome: certificate No. 382952 of 8 April 2026 for all goods applied for.

The objection: another company's sign

The preliminary conclusion of 7 May 2025 covered all class 20 goods: the sign «may mislead as to the goods (their belonging to another producer)». The grounds cited were the fifth paragraph of article 6(2) of the Law of Ukraine on Protection of Rights to Marks for Goods and Services (the Law) and point 2 of chapter 2 of section II of the Rules approved by Order of the Ministry of Economy of Ukraine No. 19889 of 6 August 2024 (the Rules).

The reasoning: «MAAG Polska Sp z o.o. (Poland) conducts its activity in Ukraine using the sign MAAG PROFILE». The examiner quoted a description of the company from its website — a manufacturer of PVC furniture edging, profiles for the joinery industry and workshop furniture — and links to the websites of MAAG Polska and of Ukrainian sellers of its products. Conclusion: goods bearing the sign «may give rise in consumers' minds to associations with the activity of MAAG Polska Sp z o.o. (Poland) which do not in fact correspond to reality».

Our response

The applicant and MAAG Polska are related, so associations with MAAG Polska fully correspond to reality. There was no need to argue the merits of the conclusion: it was enough to show that MAAG Polska does not object to the registration.

We prepared a letter of consent from MAAG Polska to registration of the trademarks in the applicant's name — bilingual, in Ukrainian and English, listing the numbers of the applications it covers.

The key point: who certifies the copy

We filed the letter of consent as an electronic copy certified with our representative's electronic signature. The office explained why such a copy is not enough: the power of attorney on file authorises the representative to act for the applicant, but not for MAAG Polska, and not to certify the signature of its director.

There are two options: the original letter of consent, or a power of attorney from the consenting company giving the representative the right to certify copies of documents. The office referred to point 7 of chapter 1 of section IV of the Rules, under which a copy of a power of attorney may be certified by the representative himself if the right to certify copies of documents is stated in the power of attorney.

We filed a power of attorney from MAAG Polska with that right. After that the examiner concluded that the sign meets the conditions for protection.

Outcome

• on 19 February 2026 the office concluded that the sign meets the conditions for protection for all class 20 goods applied for;
• on 8 April 2026 the trademark was registered under certificate No. 382952; it runs until 31 August 2033 and can be renewed;
• on the same day the word mark «maag» of the same applicant was registered under certificate No. 382953: the letter of consent and the MAAG Polska power of attorney were filed in that application too.

The conclusion does not say what persuaded the examiner; it only records that the sign meets the conditions for protection.

Our view

The decision gives no direct answer, so what follows is our assessment.

On the provision. The conclusion relied on the fifth paragraph of article 6(2) of the Law, which in the current version concerns signs that may mislead as to goods or services, in particular their properties, quality or geographical origin. In substance, however, the objection was about «belonging to another producer», which is closer to the sixth paragraph: signs that may mislead as to the person who produces the goods. It made no difference to the outcome: in both cases the Rules ask whether the associations correspond to reality (points 10 and 11 of chapter 2 of section II).

On consent. The Law provides a separate consent mechanism only for signs referred to in article 6(3) and 6(4) — similarity to other people's trademarks, commercial names known in Ukraine and the like (article 6(6) of the Law). It does not extend to misleading signs. So the letter of consent here is not «permission» but evidence that the associations with MAAG Polska are true. The Appeal Chamber assessed a football club's letter of consent the same way in the «1908 REVERA» case.

Practical points

A letter of consent is another company's document. So the applicant's power of attorney will not help. File the original, or a copy certified by a representative who holds a power of attorney from the consenting company with an express right to certify copies of documents.

Prepare documents for a group of companies in advance. If the brand is used by a related company, it pays to have its power of attorney for the representative, with the right to certify copies, before a preliminary conclusion arrives. The letter of consent can then go in one package with the response.

One letter of consent can cover several applications. List all application numbers and draw the document up in two languages: the Ukrainian version is needed for the office, the English one for the signatory.

«Misleading as to the producer» is often cleared with documents rather than arguments. The examiner searches the sign online and finds producers and sellers. If they are your client's own company or partner, show the link. See Responding to a provisional refusal from the Ukrainian IP office.

Questions and answers

If your client faces a refusal in Ukraine

We prepare responses to preliminary conclusions and Madrid provisional refusals, including objections that a sign may mislead as to the producer, and put together letters of consent and powers of attorney in the form the Ukrainian office accepts. More on how we work with IP firms.

See also: 1908 REVERA: refused over the applicants' own football club · Power of attorney for Ukrainian trademark filings