The limits of the activities of the Appeals Chamber of the NIPA in the mechanism of protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21564/2414-990X.172.347584Keywords:
protection of rights, intellectual property, mechanism for protecting rights, civil legal relations, property rights, patent, procedure for protecting rightsAbstract
The relevance of the study lies in the fact that the article focuses on the analysis of the Appeals Chamber of the National Intellectual Property Authority's activities within the mechanism of protecting and enforcing intellectual property rights. The author draws attention to the fact that the activities of the Appeals Chamber of the NIPA are carried out at various stages and sub-stages of the mechanism for protecting and enforcing intellectual property rights. In the work, taking into account the theoretical and methodological components, attention is drawn to the fact that the mechanism for the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights has its own components that define different groups of legal relations in which the Appeals Chamber of the NIPAparticipates. The purpose of the article is to outline the activities of the Appeals Chamber of the NIPA through the prism of the components of the mechanism for the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights, taking into account scientific achievements and regulatory acts. In terms of methodology, the article is based on an analysis of foreign doctrine, national views, and legislation covering the doctrine of the mechanism for the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights. The research is based on the following general and specific methods of scientific and legal cognition: formal-logical, generalisation, linguistic analysis, and comparative law. The methods presented make it possible to objectively and comprehensively outline the main features of the activities of the Appeals Chamber of the NIPA in the mechanism for protecting and defending intellectual property rights. Based on the results of the study, it was concluded that in the mechanism for protecting and defending intellectual property rights, the functioning of the Appeals Chamber of the NIPA cannot be considered in terms of the differentiation of two components: the component of preventive protection of intellectual property rights and the component of defence of intellectual property rights. This is due to the existence of stages in the mechanism for protecting and defending intellectual property rights, within which the protection and defence of intellectual property rights are implemented dynamically. This indicates the promise of further research on this topic.
References
Marczelak, O.V. (1997). Control and supervisory bodies in the constitutional legal mechanism for ensuring the basic rights and freedoms of citizens of Ukraine. Ph.D. Thesis. Kharkiv.
Constitution of Ukraine. (June 28, 1996). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/254к/96-вр#Text.
Mazzoleni, R., & Nelson, R. (1998). The benefits and costs of strong patent protection: A contribution to the current debate. Research Policy, 27(3), 273-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00048-1.
Hertzfeld, H.R., Link, A.N., & Vonortas, N.S. (2006). Intellectual property protection mechanisms in research partnerships. Research Policy, 35(6), 825-838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.04.006.
Manzini, R., & Lazzarotti, V. (2016). Intellectual property protection mechanisms in collaborative new product development. R&D Management, 46(S2), 579-595. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12126.
Li, D., & Xu, D. (2024). The Collaborative Mechanism of Digital Property Rights Protection and Intellectual Property Rights Protection in the Economic Development of the Hainan Free Trade Port. Journal of Modern Business and Economics, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.70767/jmbe.v1i1.138.
Yang, Yа. (2023). Discussion on issues related to the standardization of intellectual property protection. Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Science, 7(9), 1855-1859. http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/jhass.2023.09.029.
Qi, J., & Yu, Z. (2024). Reform of administrative protection mode of intellectual property rights in China. China and WTO Review, 10(2), 119-131.
Li, Yа., Zhang, Yі., Hu, J., & Wang, Z. (2024). Insight into the nexus between intellectual property pledge financing and enterprise innovation: A systematic analysis with multidimensional perspectives. International Review of Economics & Finance, 93(A), 700-719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2024.03.050.
Müller, S.D., Konzag, H., Nielsen, J.A., & Sandholt, H.B. (2024). Digital transformation leadership competencies: A contingency approach. International Journal of Information Management, 75, 102734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102734.
Ding, T., & Yang, L. (2025). Intellectual property protection and corporate digital transformation: An empirical analysis from the perspectives of intellectual property protection and digital governance. International Review of Economics & Finance, 100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2025.104125.
Ren, Yu., Wang, X., & Yu, M. (2025). Administrative Protection of Intellectual Property and Corporate Innovation: Evidence from China. SSRN. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5295311.
Koval, I. (2025). Administrative legal protection and enforcement of industrial property rights. Theory and Practice of Intellectual Property, 3, 32-42. https://doi.org/10.33731/32025.338634.
Shevchenko, Ya.M. (Ed.). (1994). Vlasnyk & Property Rights. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka.
Vavzhenchuk, S.Ya. (2022). Contract law. (Vol. 1-2). Vol. 1. Kharkiv: Pravo.
Civil Code of Ukraine No. 435-IV. (January 16, 2003). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/card/435-15.
Kapitanenko, N.P. (2020). Administrative and legal status of subjects in the field of intellectual property right implementation. Law and Society, 3(2), 46-52. https://doi.org/10.32842/2078-3736/2020.3-2.8.
Virchenko, V.V. (2014). Subject composition of intellectual property relations. Theoretical and Practical Issues of Economics, 2(29), 139-152. Retrieved from http://tppe.econom.univ.kiev.ua/data/2014_29/zb29_13.pdf.
Kodynets, A. (2025). Improving administrative procedures for the protection of inventions and utility models: Challenges and issues. In Creation, protection, defense, and commercialization of intellectual property rights: Proceedings of the 8th All-Ukrain. scient. and pract. conf. with international participation dedicated to World Intellectual Property Day (pp. 317-327). Kyiv: Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute. Retrieved from http://cpdcipr.kpi.ua/article/view/327849/317681.
Decree of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 943-р "On certain issues of the National Intellectual Property Office of Ukraine". (October 28, 2022). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/943-2022-р#Text.
Law of Ukraine No. 3687-XII "On Protection of Rights to Inventions and Utility Models". (December 15, 1993). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3687-12#n10.
Law of Ukraine No. 3688-XII "On Protection of Rights to Industrial Designs". (December 15, 1993). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3688-12#Text.
Law of Ukraine No. 3689-XII "On Protection of Rights to Trademarks". (December 15, 1993). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3689-12#Text.
Law of Ukraine No. 621/97-VR "On Protection of Rights to Semiconductor Product Layouts". (November 5, 1997). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/621/97-вр#Text.
Law of Ukraine No. 752-XIV "On Legal Protection of Geographical Indications". (June 16, 1999). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/752-14#Text.
Tarsenko, L. (2021). Patent legislation reform (2020): main innovations of inventions (utility models). Visnyk of the Lviv University. Series Law, 73, 67-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.30970/vla.2021.73.067.
Tverzenko, O. (2024). NOIV: NIPA: Historical Background, Status, and Prospects for Legislative Regulation. Theory and Practice of Intellectual Property, 4, 66-76. https://doi.org/10.33731/42024.317236.
Panasuk, K.T. (2025). Peculiarities of the legal status of the Appellate Chamber of the Ukrainian Intellectual Property Office. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod National University. Series: Law, 89(1), 390-395. https://doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2025.89.1.54.
Order of the Ministry of Economy of Ukraine No. 17768 "On the Approval of the Regulations of the Appellate Chamber of the National Intellectual Property Office of Ukraine". (November 23, 2023). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0021-24#Text.
Vavzhenchuk, S.Ya. (2025). The construction of ‘invalidation of intellectual property rights’ as a way to protect the right: a tragic experience of catharsis. Theory and practice of intellectual property, 3, 53-60. https://doi.org/10.33731/32025.338968.
Drobiazko, R., & Koval-Lavok, M. (2024). Resumption of the work of the Appellate Chamber of UKRNOIV. European Business Association. Retrieved from https://eba.com.ua/vidnovleno-robotu-apelyatsijnoyi-palaty-ukrnoivi/.
Law of Ukraine No. 1875-IX "On Mediation". (November 16, 2021). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1875-20#Text.
Code of Professional Ethics: Order of the State Organization "Ukrainian National Intellectual Property and Innovation Office" No. 159-N/2023. (September 7, 2023). Retrieved from https://ip-mediation.nipo.gov.ua/resources/detail/kodeks-profesijnoyi-etiki.
European Code of Conduct for Mediation Providers. (December 3-4, 2018). Adopted at the 31st plenary meeting of the CEPEJ. Strasbourg. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/cepej-2018-24-en-mediation-development-toolkit-european-code-of-conduc/1680901dc6.
European Code of Conduct for Mediators. (June 2, 2004). European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). Brussels. Retrieved from https://www.amcr.cz/dokumenty/adr_ec_code_conduct_en.pdf.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Сергій Ярославович Вавженчук
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
