1908 REVERA

The examiner found a football club using the same sign and refused registration, reasoning that consumers would link the goods to the club. But the club is owned by one of the applicants. The Appeal Chamber established this itself, from the club's website and the Ukrainian business register, and set the refusal aside.

Decision of the Appeal Chamber of UANIPIO of 8 September 2026, approved by Order No. 321/2026 of 20 October 2026. The composite sign «1908 REVERA» under application No. m202324500 is to be registered for all class 25 goods and class 41 services applied for.

The parties and the sign

• Applicants: two individuals from Ivano-Frankivsk; the application was filed on 20 December 2023;
• Sign: composite — the numerals «1908», the word REVERA and a circle with a stylised letter R, in gold, red and dark blue;
• Specification: Nice class 25 (clothing and footwear, including football boots) and class 41 services;
• The club: football club «Ревера 1908» (Revera 1908) from Ivano-Frankivsk; its official website presents the activity of FOOTBALL CLUB REVERA 1908 LLC, registered on 20 October 2023.

Why the examiner refused

On 13 June 2025 the examiner issued a preliminary conclusion: the sign may mislead as to the person who produces the goods and provides the services (the sixth paragraph of article 6(2) of the Law of Ukraine on Protection of Rights to Marks for Goods and Services, the Law). The reasoning was the football club «Ревера 1908», founded in 2020, which in June 2024 obtained professional status and the right to play in the Second League of the Professional Football League of Ukraine. Its name honours the first local team «Ревера», formed in 1908. The examiner's source was the club's Wikipedia page.

According to the conclusion, the club «conducts its activity using a trademark identical to the applied-for sign», so goods and services bearing the sign «may give rise in consumers' minds to associations with the activity of the above football club which do not in fact correspond to reality».

The last words are the key. The Rules approved by Order of the Ministry of Economy of Ukraine No. 19889 of 6 August 2024 (the Rules) treat a sign as misleading as to the producer when it may cause associations with a certain person «which do not in fact correspond to reality» (point 11 of chapter 2 of section II).

No response to the preliminary conclusion was received within the set term, and on 9 April 2026 UANIPIO refused registration for all goods and services on the same grounds.

What was filed with the Appeal Chamber

On 3 June 2026 the applicants filed an appeal against the refusal. They argued that the circumstances underlying it had been removed and attached copies of two documents:

• a letter of consent from FOOTBALL CLUB REVERA 1908 LLC of 3 June 2026, No. 73: the company gave its «free and irrevocable consent» to use and registration of the sign in the applicants' names for the whole specification;
• an agreement between the applicants and the company of 13 September 2024 on the use of the trademark rights until registration.

What the Board established

The Board did not limit itself to the copies filed. It opened the same source the examiner had relied on, the club's Wikipedia page, and found there the club's official website and one of the appellants named as the club's president. The club's website presents its activity under the applied-for sign, and a post of 27 July 2026 names the same appellant as the club's founder.

The Board then checked the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, Individual Entrepreneurs and Public Organisations. That appellant is the ultimate beneficial owner of FOOTBALL CLUB REVERA 1908 LLC: he holds 87.4125% directly, and the remaining 12.5874% belongs to a venture fund whose sole ultimate beneficial owner is also him.

The Board concluded that these circumstances «taken together show a direct link» between the appellant and the company, «as well as the awareness and consent of that company to registration of the applied-for sign in the appellants' names». The associations with the club that the sign may cause «will correspond to the actual circumstances, and therefore there is no danger of misleading consumers as to the producer of the goods or the provider of the services».

The Board also explained when this ground applies: misleading signs may include «an exact reproduction, imitation or copying of commercial designations of another business entity known to consumers, regardless of their registration as a trademark», if this may lead to confusion with that entity's activity. In this case the business entity turned out not to be «another».

Our view: consent as evidence, not as permission

The decision does not say this directly, so what follows is our assessment.

The Law knows consent as a separate mechanism: under article 6(6) of the Law a sign may be registered with the consent of the owner of an earlier registered trademark or another earlier right. But this provision covers only signs referred to in article 6(3) and 6(4): similarity to other people's trademarks, commercial names known in Ukraine, industrial designs and the like. Misleading signs fall under article 6(2), and consent as «permission» does not extend to them.

So the letter of consent did not decide the matter on its own. The Board used it as one piece of evidence that the associations with the club are true. The decisive point was the confirmed link between the applicant and the club, established from the club's website and the state register.

What the Board left unaddressed

The reasoning does not examine the second applicant's link to the club: the link of one appellant and the company's consent were enough for the Board. The agreement of 13 September 2024 is mentioned only in the summary of the appellants' position and is not assessed in the reasoning.

Outcome

• the appeal was upheld in full and the UANIPIO decision of 9 April 2026 refusing registration was set aside;
• the trademark is to be registered for all class 25 goods and class 41 services applied for, subject to payment of the fee for publication of the grant and the state duty for issuing the certificate;
• the decision took effect on approval by order, 20 October 2026, and may be challenged in court within two months from receipt;
• the fee for filing the appeal, according to the decision, «is to be refunded in the manner and amount established by law».

Practical points

If the founders file and the company uses the sign, show the link. The examiner sees a company using the same sign online and does not know who stands behind it. An extract from the Unified State Register, a letter of consent from the company and an agreement on use answer the question, best of all already in the response to the preliminary conclusion. See Responding to a provisional refusal from the Ukrainian IP office.

Decide in advance whose name to file in. The structure «the trademark belongs to the founders, the company uses it under an agreement» is lawful and common, but it needs paperwork. See Assignments and licences in Ukraine: the register entry decides.

Misleading as to the producer is about whether the associations are true, not about how well known the name is. Here the associations with the club are true, so the ground fell away. Compare the «w walky» case, where the Appeal Chamber noted that the reputation of trademarks is not in itself a sufficient basis for finding that consumers may be misled as to the producer.

The Board may check public sources itself. Here the key facts were established from the club's website and the state register, not only from the copies filed. But it is better not to rely on that: file the evidence of the link yourself.

If your client's brand in Ukraine is held by founders

Founders and the operating company are often different persons in the Ukrainian register, and the examiner may read the company's own use as use by «another person». We prepare responses to preliminary conclusions and appeals to the Appeal Chamber, put together evidence of the link between applicant and user, and advise on whose name a mark should be filed in. More on how we work with IP firms.

Questions we are asked about this case

Can a Ukrainian trademark be registered to a founder if the sign is used by the founder's company?

Yes. In the «1908 REVERA» case the Appeal Chamber set aside the refusal once it established that one of the applicants is the ultimate beneficial owner of the company that uses the sign, and that the company consented to registration in the applicants' names. The Board found that the associations with the club correspond to the actual circumstances.

Does a letter of consent help against a refusal on the ground of misleading as to the producer?

Article 6(6) of the Law of Ukraine on Protection of Rights to Marks for Goods and Services provides for the owner's consent as a separate basis for registration only for signs covered by article 6(3) and 6(4). Misleading signs fall under article 6(2). In this case the Board assessed the letter of consent together with data from the Unified State Register and the club's website, as evidence that the associations with the club are true.

When is a sign misleading as to the person who produces the goods or provides the services in Ukraine?

Under point 11 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, when it contains elements that point to a certain person and may cause consumers to associate it with a producer or service provider in a way that does not correspond to reality. If the associations are true, the ground does not apply.

Can a refusal be appealed if no response was filed to the preliminary conclusion?

Yes. Under article 15(1) of the Law of Ukraine on Protection of Rights to Marks for Goods and Services the applicant may appeal a decision on the application to the Appeal Chamber or to the court within two months from receipt of the decision. In this case the Board considered the documents filed with the appeal.

See also: w walky: a store name is not yet a brand on goods · CRICOVA: a brand registered to someone else in Ukraine