Interim relief in brand disputes: documents to prepare
Interim relief in a brand dispute needs early proof of the right, proof of urgency, and a clear account of harm if relief is refused. Courts expect a complete file at filing: the registration extract, evidence of use, correspondence with the other side, and a draft order. Missing documents delay the hearing, not just the decision.
What changes once the application is filed
The point of no return arrives at filing, not at the hearing. A court that receives an incomplete file will usually refuse the request rather than pause proceedings to let the applicant fill gaps. A second attempt on the same facts is possible, but it starts the clock again and the other side is now aware of the claim.
Where the dispute grows out of a commercial agreement rather than a bare infringement, the underlying contract can shape the request itself. If a supply or distribution agreement sits behind the disputed use, its own dispute mechanism, including any Change control in technology contracts clause, may need to be addressed before a court will treat the matter as urgent.
A complete file also affects whether the court is willing to act without hearing the other side first. Ex parte relief is reserved for cases where notice would defeat the purpose of the order; a thin file makes that argument harder to sustain.
Documents to prepare
The list below is the practical minimum. A given court may ask for more depending on the facts, but none of these six is usually skipped.
| Document | Purpose | Who prepares it |
|---|---|---|
| Registration extract | Proves the scope and ownership of the right | Client, from the relevant register |
| Evidence of use | Shows the mark is live and the harm is real | Client, from marketing or sales records |
| Correspondence with the other side | Shows notice was given and no adequate response followed | Client and counsel jointly |
| Evidence of urgency | Shows delay would cause harm that money cannot undo | Client, with dated records |
| Draft order | Sets out precisely what is asked of the court | Counsel |
| Undertaking in damages | Commits the applicant to cover loss if the order turns out unjustified | Counsel, signed by the client |
Evidence of use and evidence of urgency are often the same documents viewed twice: a sales drop, a customer complaint, a supplier switching away. The file works better when both angles are drawn from the same record rather than assembled separately.
Who decides, and how the file is read
The decision sits with the court that would hear the underlying infringement claim, not with a registry or an administrative body. That court reads the file for two things: is the right real, and is the harm real enough to justify acting before the full case is heard.
The exercise has a cousin in patent practice, where the decision-maker works from the same instinct: read the right narrowly, then ask whether the facts fit inside it. For a longer account of that reading exercise, see How claim construction patent what the decision maker looks.
The court's own list, the completeness of the file, and whether the other side is heard first all set the pace of a decision. A request heard without notice moves fastest; a request heard on notice adds the time needed for the other side to respond before any order issues.
Common forks
If the infringing use sits only online, on a marketplace or a social platform, a takedown notice may resolve the matter faster than a court application, and can run in parallel with one. The steps and documents for that route differ from a court filing; see How platform takedown procedure trade mark documents to prepare for a shorter alternative that does not always need a hearing.
If the mark under dispute is tied to a token offering rather than a conventional product line, the offering material itself may need to be secured as part of the evidence file before it is amended or withdrawn. Where that applies, see Offering document content token issuance for what such documents typically contain.
If the other side is a licensee rather than a stranger, the request changes shape again. The court will want to know whether the licence itself is still in force, since a lapsed or disputed licence removes the defence that use was authorised.
Sources and limit
This page describes a procedure. It does not set out the legal test a particular court applies, the fees involved, or the specific time limits that run in any one jurisdiction; those depend on the court seized of the matter and on facts not covered here. Readers working across more than one register will find the underlying source list and its limits described by jurisdiction; for Latvia, see Asset in Latvia explained.
Last checked: this page reflects general procedural practice as commonly applied across EU member state courts handling brand disputes, and is reviewed on the same cycle as the rest of this section.
Related publications
Readers preparing a file for court often also need the online-only route as a fallback or a parallel step. That comparison sits in How platform takedown procedure trade mark documents to prepare, referenced above.
Before you file
If the mark you are protecting is out on licence, an unresolved question about whether that licence survives a counterparty's insolvency can undercut an otherwise strong urgency argument. That question, and what it costs to get it wrong, is addressed in When a licence survives insolvency, or does not: what.
Frequently asked questions
How long does interim relief in brand disputes take in practice?
There is no fixed figure that holds across courts. The court's own list, the completeness of the file, and whether the request is heard with or without notice to the other side all set the pace. A request heard without notice moves fastest; a request heard on notice waits for a response first.
Which documents are needed to start?
At minimum: the registration extract, evidence of use, correspondence with the other side, evidence of urgency, a draft order, and an undertaking in damages. The table above sets out who typically prepares each one.
What happens if the other side does not respond?
Silence does not amount to an admission. Where the other side was properly served and still does not respond, the court can proceed to decide on the file it has. A lack of response can, in practice, support the urgency argument rather than weaken it.