The relevance of the research topic is due to the fact that compulsory licensing in the field of intellectual property is a tool for balancing private and public interests in the case of the use of property rights to specific objects. In the field of legal regulation of compulsory licensing, there are many problems associated with the incompleteness, inconsistency, inconsistency of legal approaches, which complicates the practice of their application. The problem of harmonization of the legislation of Ukraine with the EU law, its conformity to the best world standards is actual. Therefore, there was a need to develop scientifically sound proposals aimed at reforming the legal regulation of the outlined area of research. The author proposed the definition of a compulsory license, which should be understood as a non-exclusive, temporary, paid license, which the owner of a patent (certificate) is obliged to issue to an interested person on the basis of a court decision or issued by the government, utility models, industrial designs, arrangement of semiconductor products, plant varieties. The author also identified the essential features of a compulsory license. The author substantiated the conclusion that the conceptual apparatus of the Laws of Ukraine "On protection of rights to inventions and utility models", "On protection of rights to industrial designs", "On protection of plant variety rights", "On protection of rights to semiconductor products" should be unified, abandoning the concept of "rights holder", "rights holder" and replacing it with the concept of "patent holder (certificate)". The author notes the need to supplement the list of circumstances under which the government may issue a compulsory license with the following clarifying circumstances: conducting an anti-terrorist operation, the need to provide treatment for persons temporarily displaced from the occupied territories, uncontrolled migration, and objective growth of social spread. The author concludes that dependent licenses are granted on the actual state of dependence (on the invention, utility model), which later patented cannot be fully used without the use of the invention (utility model), the patent for which was previously issued, and in the relevant field. The author notes that a compulsory license can only be non-exclusive, with the scope of the invention (utility model, other industrial property), the term of the license, the amount and procedure for payment of monetary compensation to the patent owner (certificate). The author established that the legislation on compulsory licensing of plant variety rights in the EU provides for the possibility of obtaining a compulsory license at the EU level (the decision is made by the Community Plant Variety Office in the public interest). At the level of individual EU countries, it is also possible to obtain a compulsory license, mostly dependent, in accordance with the requirements of national law. The author substantiates that the provisions of EU Regulation № 816/2006 are aimed at solving the health problems not of the EU countries, but of less developed countries and developing countries. Therefore, compulsory licensing is aimed at the production of products that will improve the access of citizens of these countries to available medicines. The author concludes that compulsory licenses under the law of most EU countries are issued by the relevant national patent office (Portugal, Spain, Poland, Hungary, Sweden, etc.). In some countries, such licenses may be issued by a specialized court (Germany, France). Compulsory licenses are issued due to non-use or insufficient use of the invention (utility model) or due to the public interest. The author substantiates the conclusion on the expediency of transferring the authority to issue compulsory licenses for inventions, utility models, industrial designs, semiconductor products to the National Intellectual Property Authority, and the authority on compulsory licensing of plant variety rights - to the relevant organization in plant patenting. With the establishment of the High Court of Intellectual Property, it must consider this category of disputes.
