UKRAINE Law and Practice Contributed by: Yaroslav Ognevyuk, AMBASSADORS
maintenance fees. Failure to pay such fees results in lapse of rights, although reinstatement may be pos- sible within limited statutory periods. Utility models are protected for ten years and follow a similar main- tenance structure. Ukraine provides for supplementary protection certifi- cates (SPCs) in the pharmaceutical sector, allowing extension of patent protection for medicinal products under specific conditions. However, obtaining and enforcing such extensions remains procedurally com- plex and is still developing in practice. From an enforcement perspective, the formal scope of rights is only a starting point. Ukrainian courts tend to engage deeply with technical evidence and expert opinions, and even well-drafted claims may be nar- rowed or reinterpreted during disputes. At the same time, patents that appear broad on paper may prove difficult to enforce if they lack evidentiary support or technical clarity. 1.4 Ownership, Assignment and Licensing Under Ukrainian law, the right to apply for and own a patent generally belongs to the inventor or their legal successor. In an employment context, however, rights typically vest in the employer, provided the invention is created within the scope of employment duties or under a specific assignment. Disputes over employee inventions are not uncommon, particularly where con- tractual arrangements are unclear or compensation mechanisms are not properly structured. Universities and research institutions follow similar principles, although ownership often depends on internal policies and funding arrangements, which may add layers of complexity to collaborative or grant-funded projects. Assignments of patent rights must be made in writing and are effective against third parties only upon reg- istration with the relevant authority. The same applies to licence agreements, particularly exclusive licences. While unregistered agreements may be valid between the parties, they offer limited protection in enforce- ment scenarios.
Formal ownership is only part of the equation. Ukrain- ian courts place significant emphasis on the chain of title, and any gaps, inconsistencies, or poorly docu- mented transfers may be used to challenge stand- ing in litigation. This becomes particularly relevant in cross-border structures, where rights are often frag- mented across multiple jurisdictions. Оwnership and licensing in Ukraine are not merely transactional issues. They are enforcement-critical: the strength of a patent right depends on its validity, on the clarity and defensibility of its ownership history. 1.5 Patent Infringement and Defences Patent infringement in Ukraine covers both the direct use of a patented invention and indirect involve- ment, including supplying components or facilitating a patented solution. While the statutory framework provides a conventional definition, disputes are rarely straightforward and are typically driven by technical interpretation. In the pharmaceutical sector, the Bolar exemption per- mits limited use of patented inventions for regulatory purposes prior to expiry. Its boundaries remain con- tested, particularly where preparatory steps begin to resemble market-entry activities rather than regulatory compliance. Patent litigation in Ukraine is increasingly used as a strategic tool in market competition. This dynamic is most visible in the pharmaceutical and agrochemical sectors, where litigation is leveraged to delay generic entry or preserve market exclusivity. The scope of protection is determined primarily by the claims, but Ukrainian courts do not apply a rigid literal approach. Instead, they rely heavily on expert evidence to assess whether an allegedly infringing product or process falls within the scope of protec- tion, including functional or equivalent characteristics. In litigation, the outcome of patent disputes depends heavily on court-appointed expert examinations, which often play a decisive role in determining both infringement and the technical scope. The selection of an expert institution, the formulation of questions, and the interpretation of findings can materially influence the result of the case.
368 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook