Принцип пропорційності у праві інтелектуальної власності ЄС
Loading...
Date
2018
Authors
Михайлюк, Галина
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
У статті розкрито сутність дії методологічного принципу інтерпретації Європейського суду
справедливості Marleasing (походить від назви однієї зі сторін справи), що домінує у частині непозовного провадження та підтримуваного принципом пропорційності, а також національними режимами інтелектуальної власності. Зазначений принцип, доцільний для запровадження у цивільно-процесуальній діяльності судових органів України, полягає у визнанні свободи держав для наближення їхніх власних правових систем до європейського правового порядку через еволюційний процес
нормативної сумісності (паралельної дії двох систем: національних законодавств країн-членів ЄС
і права ЄС у контексті їхньої структурної взаємодії через поступову гармонізацію, адаптацію
з правом ЄС) без шкоди їхній "юридичній раціональності".
As a result of a country’s accession to the EU, primary and secondary EU law becomes a part of the national law, which still maintains a certain autonomy. EU authorities also promote the correctness and unambiguity of the application of EU law within national jurisdictions. This is manifested primarily in the functions of the ECJ, which can provide a detailed interpretation of appeals from national courts in cases where there are doubts about the interpretation of certain legal norms of the EU. Marleasing, a methodological principle of ECJ interpretation (a term introduced by J. Pila), has been considered and supported by the principle of proportionality and national intellectual property regimes. The central element of the principle of proportionality on the basis of methodology is the doctrine of indirect effect, i.e. the directives can be applied in private law disputes and in relations between private individuals (however, the decision in the case of Marleasing insists on using only the provisions of directives themselves for resolution in such relations). A dispute is solved by using both the Member States law and the Community law, where the norms of the EU law provide the possibility of broad interpretation, and the internal rules provide for a maximum consideration of local traditions and characteristics with respect to the dispute. Marleasing should be introduced to the civil procedure activities of the judicial bodies of Ukraine. It is considered as recognition of the freedom of States to bring their own legal systems towards the European legal order through an evolutionary process of regulatory compatibility (parallel activity of the two systems: the national legislations of the EU Member States and the EU law in the context of their structural cooperation through a gradual harmonization and adaptation of national legislation with the EU law) without prejudice to their “legal rationality”.
As a result of a country’s accession to the EU, primary and secondary EU law becomes a part of the national law, which still maintains a certain autonomy. EU authorities also promote the correctness and unambiguity of the application of EU law within national jurisdictions. This is manifested primarily in the functions of the ECJ, which can provide a detailed interpretation of appeals from national courts in cases where there are doubts about the interpretation of certain legal norms of the EU. Marleasing, a methodological principle of ECJ interpretation (a term introduced by J. Pila), has been considered and supported by the principle of proportionality and national intellectual property regimes. The central element of the principle of proportionality on the basis of methodology is the doctrine of indirect effect, i.e. the directives can be applied in private law disputes and in relations between private individuals (however, the decision in the case of Marleasing insists on using only the provisions of directives themselves for resolution in such relations). A dispute is solved by using both the Member States law and the Community law, where the norms of the EU law provide the possibility of broad interpretation, and the internal rules provide for a maximum consideration of local traditions and characteristics with respect to the dispute. Marleasing should be introduced to the civil procedure activities of the judicial bodies of Ukraine. It is considered as recognition of the freedom of States to bring their own legal systems towards the European legal order through an evolutionary process of regulatory compatibility (parallel activity of the two systems: the national legislations of the EU Member States and the EU law in the context of their structural cooperation through a gradual harmonization and adaptation of national legislation with the EU law) without prejudice to their “legal rationality”.
Description
Keywords
методологія, правова система, європейське право, інтерпретація, інтелектуальна власність, стаття, methodology, legal system, European law, interpretation, intellectual property
Citation
Михайлюк Г. О. Принцип пропорційності у праві інтелектуальної власності ЄС / Михайлюк Г. О. // Наукові записки НаУКМА. Юридичні науки. - 2018. - Т. 2. - С. 63-66.