Administrative principles of intellectual property rights protection against unfair competition on the pharmaceutical market in Ukraine

Keywords: administrative protection of intellectual property rights, unfair competition,pharmaceutical market, AMCU, NIPA Appeals Chamber, post-grant opposition,pre-grant opposition The article is dedicated to study for peculiarities of intellectual propertyrights protection on pharmaceutical market under administrative procedure. Thepaper enlightens importance of balancing the regulation of antitrust and intellectualproperty law, through legislative reform as well. It is emphasized on the specifics ofthe jurisdictional form of rights protection, which is comprised from judicial protectionand administrative protection of infringed intellectual property rights. The authordenotes that the administrative procedure is a special form of protection, whichinvolves appealing to government agencies for violated rights protection. The studyuncovers the following main state bodies, entrusted with the relevant functions andwhich consider applications on measures for violated rights protection: The AntimonopolyCommittee of Ukraine and the Appeals Chamber of the National IntellectualProperty Authority (NIPA Appeals Chamber). It is stated that the AntimonopolyCommittee of Ukraine is qualified to consider offences in terms of protection againstunfair competition, respectively, the NIPA Appeals Chamber considers objectionsagainst the National Intellectual Property Authority, appeals and applications forrecognition of the trademark to be well-known in Ukraine. Emphasis is placed on themechanisms of «post-grant opposition» (recognition of rights to inventions (utilitymodel), industrial designs invalid) by the NIPA Appeals Chamber and «pre-grant opposition» (possibility of appealing decisions by third party to the NIPA Appeals Chamber).It is proved that the NIPA Appeals Chamber is a competent and qualified bodyin the intellectual property field, enabled to protect intellectual property rights, includingagainst «patent trolling», «evergreen» patents and counteract indirectly withunfair competition. The paper proves that the administrative procedure for the intellectualproperty rights protection is speedier than the judicial procedure, but is as effectiveand efficient as judicial protection.