This information is derived from the State Department's Office of Investment Affairs, Investment Climate Statement. Any questions on the ICS can be directed to EB-ICS-DL@state.gov
Last Published: 2/26/2018

Real Property

Serbia has an adequate body of laws for the protection of property rights, but enforcement of property rights through the judicial system can be very slow. A multitude of factors can complicate property titles – restitution claims, unlicensed and illegal construction, limitation of property rights to “rights of use,” outright title fraud and other issues. Investors are cautioned to investigate thoroughly all property title issues on land intended for investment projects.

During the country’s socialist years, owners of nationalized land became “users” of the land and acquired “rights of use” that, until 2003, could not be freely sold or transferred. In July 2015, the government adopted a law that allows for property usage rights to be converted into ownership rights with payment of a market-based fee.

In March 2015, the government implemented new amendments to the Law on Planning and Construction that separated the issuance of permits from conversion issues. These amendments cut the administrative deadline for issuing construction permits for a potential investor to 30 days and introduced a one-stop shop for electronic construction permits.

Serbia’s real property registration system is based on a municipal cadaster and land books. Serbia has the basis for an organized real estate cadaster and property title system. However, legalizing tens of thousands of structures built over the past twenty years without proper licenses remains an enormous challenge, as 1.5 million buildings in Serbia are not registered in the cadaster. Of this total, only 800,000 building owners have applied for legalization. In November 2015, the government adopted a new Law on Legalization, which simplified the registration process.

The World Bank’s 2017 Doing Business Report ranks Serbia 56th of 190 countries for time required to register real property (21 days).

Intellectual Property Rights

Serbia is a World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) member and a signatory to all key agreements administered by WIPO. The government has taken steps to implement and enforce the WTO Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement. Serbia’s intellectual property rights (IPR) laws include TRIPS-compliant provisions and are enforced by courts and administrative authorities.

For the most part, Serbia’s IPR legislation is modern and compliant with both the EU acquis communautaire and international standards. According to the EU’s 2016 Progress Report, Serbia has done a good job aligning its IP legislation with the acquis. Serbian laws extend legal protections to all major forms of IPR (including patents, trademarks, copyrights, industrial designs, geographic indicators, and semiconductor products). Serbia’s goal is to adopt amendments to the Law on Trademarks, the Law on Patents, the Law on Semiconductor Circuits, and the Law on Copyright and Related Rights by 2018 to bring these pieces of legislation fully in line with the acquis. In addition, amendments to the Law on Special Competence for Efficient Protection of Intellectual Property Rights are also expected, which will reorganize enforcement responsibilities among inspectorates responsible for IPR protection.

The level of IPR protection in Serbia is still improving. Enforcement remains haphazard, but is roughly consistent with levels in neighboring countries. The government has a Permanent Coordination Body for IPR enforcement activities with participation of the tax administration, police, customs, and a number of state inspection services. The Public Procurement Law requires bidders to affirm that they have ownership rights to any IPR utilized in fulfilling a public procurement contract.

On enforcement, the number of counterfeit and pirated goods confiscated in 2015 was only about half the number confiscated in 2014. Counterfeit trademarked goods, particularly athletic footwear and clothing, are available, although the government has stepped up its actions to combat illegal street sales and seize pirated goods at the border. Upon seizure, authorities cannot destroy goods unless they receive formal instructions from the rights holders. Then storage and destruction of counterfeit goods is billed to the rights holders. The Customs Administration and Trade Inspection issue periodicreports on seizures, but these are segregated according to the type of goods (e.g. cigarettes or apparel), rather than type of infringement (e.g. IPR or tax payments). Data on seizures is not publicly available.

The tax administration checks software legality during its regular tax controls of businesses, but seeks to cease its software inspection operations on the grounds that it is a non-core activity. The number of criminal charges for violations increased from 90 in 2014 to 105 in 2015. The estimated value of Serbia’s illegal software market is approximately $116 million. According to the latest International Data Corporation (IDC) study from 2015, software piracy in Serbia is around 67 percent. Although this is down from 72 percent in 2011, it remains among the highest piracy rates in the Balkan region. However, the number of legal entities using illegal software continues to drop and is estimated at 55 percent in 2016.

Procedures for registration of industrial property rights and deposition of works of authorship before the Serbian Intellectual Property Office are straightforward and similar to procedures in most European countries. Relevant information is available at the Republic of Serbia's Intellectual Property Office's website.

Regarding copyright and related rights, Serbia has room to improve, particularly with regard to the digitalization of orphan works and broadcasting of audiovisual works, including cross-border, satellite, and cable broadcasting. Serbia could:

  • Amend the Criminal Procedure Code and related procedural laws, particularly in the area of cyber-crime
  • Adopt implementing regulations for various IPR laws that specify enforcement procedures and steps, currently subject to different interpretation by relevant authorities
  • Reverse Copyright Law amendments from December 2012, when the National Assembly exempted small businesses from paying royalties for copyrighted music, capped fees payable to collective rights managers, and allowed businesses to pay one collective bill for all music rights
  • Amend the Copyright Law regarding collective rights for video works
  • Align the Laws on Copyright, Topographies of Semiconductor Products, Patents and Trademarks with the EU acquis, including with the IPR Enforcement Directive
  • Amend the Law on Trademarks to enable third parties to oppose trademark registration if the submitted trademark resembles that party’s registered trademark

Enforcement of rights by state authorities, such as inspectorates or customs authorities, can be relatively fast. However, enforcement of IPR rights in the court system often lasts up to two years. With the creation of semi-specialized IP courts, which began operating fully in 2015, these proceedings could improve. The Serbian Intellectual Property Office continues to organize IPR-focused training for judges, with the expectation that more specialized understanding of IPR rights will enable more timely court decisions.

Serbia is not listed in the Special 301 Report or the Notorious Market Report. For additional information about treaty obligations and points of contact at local IP offices, please see WIPO’s country profiles.

Prepared by our U.S. Embassies abroad. With its network of 108 offices across the United States and in more than 75 countries, the U.S. Commercial Service of the U.S. Department of Commerce utilizes its global presence and international marketing expertise to help U.S. companies sell their products and services worldwide. Locate the U.S. Commercial Service trade specialist in the U.S. nearest you by visiting http://export.gov/usoffices.


More Information

Serbia Economic Development and Investment Law