THE RIGHT TO CLAIM FOR INVALIDATION OF INVENTION (UTILITY MODEL) RIGHTS IN THE COURT PROCEDURE

The article is devoted to the legal analysis of the recognition of rights to an invention (utility model) as invalid in court. It analyzes the features of the subject composition of persons who have the right to file a claim for invalidation of invention (utility model) rights. It is established that in 2020, the institution of invalidating invention (utility model) patents was replaced by the institution of invalidation of invention (utility model) rights. It is proven that when initiating court proceedings, the plaintiff describes several key issues in the lawsuit: which right (interest) is violated; by whose actions or inaction such right is violated (who should be involved as a defendant in the case); whose rights or obligations may be affected by the decision in the case (who should be involved as a third party who does not make independent claims regarding the subject of the dispute); what circumstances confirm the fact of violation of the right (interest) of the plaintiff (the actual basis of the claim) and the evidence that proves that such circumstances took place; the provisions of law on the basis of which the plaintiff will substantiate his/her claims (legal basis of the claim), and within which jurisdiction the dispute should be resolved. It is established that the right to appeal the decision of the NOIP Appeals Chamber regarding invalidation of the rights to an invention or utility model is exercised only by the parties to such proceedings, i.e. the complainant, or the owner of a patent whose rights have been declared invalid in whole or in part by such a decision of the NOIP Appeals Chamber. It is substantiated that the basis for invalidating invention (utility model) rights is a combination of two proven factual circumstances: violation of the rights (legal interests) of the plaintiff as a result of the validity of invention (utility model) rights and the real existence of grounds for the court to recognize invention (utility model) rights are invalid. It is highlighted that the violation of the plaintiff's rights or legal interests in the rights to invalidate the right to an invention, a utility model can be justified by: the existence of rights to similar utility models that were registered earlier than the rights of the defendant; availability of the plaintiff's co-inventor's rights; impossibility to carry out economic activities, manufacture and use products on the territory of Ukraine (due to patent trolling of the defendant as a patent owner); impossibility to freely import into the territory of Ukraine the goods that can be considered to be manufactured using each feature included in the independent clause of the claim of the invention under the current patent; violation of the plaintiff's rights as an employer (the subject of property rights to a service invention, utility model), the existence of rights to an invention (utility model) registered by other persons, etc. Keywords: patent, industrial property, court, intellectual property, lawsuit