The paper highlights main trends in international technology transfer law regulation development. The priority challenges related to overcoming the fragmentation of international legal regulation in the research area are outlined. The components of technology transfer are analyzed and the legal principles of their international legal regulation are developed.

Background. Problems of abuse of subjective civil law have aroused special interest among researchers of civil science. At the same time, scholars have ignored the problem of abuse of subjective family law, the specifics and features that are inherent in family law science given the unique legal nature of the industry. Analysis of recent research and publications has shown that despite the existence of some scientific works in civil doctrine, the chosen topic remains unresolved, an important scientific problem on the essence of understanding the legal category of abuse of family law and related features of subjective rights. The purpose of the study is to substantiate scientific and theoretical approaches to the category of «abuse of rights», which are related to the laws of legal regulation of abuse of subjective personal non-property and property rights of family members and determine the legal understanding of abuse of family law. Materials and methods. To achieve this goal and fulfill the tasks, in the process of scientific research a set of methods of scientific knowledge is used. The methodological basis of scientific work were general philosophical approaches, as well as general scientific and special scientific methods, which provided the opportunity to establish the essence and legal understanding of the concept of abuse of family law. Results. The legal literature in general covers different approaches to the legal understanding of the abuse of subjective law in general. The analysis of the problem of abuse of law is closely related to the need to clarify the very concept of «subjective law», which in particular means the implementation of actions by an authorized person contrary to the purpose of subjective law with the characterization of the law as unfair and harmful to public interests and / or personal interests of third parties or creates a real threat of its infliction in the formal legality of actions. It is established that abuse of family rights can be divided into such types as: 1) legalized abuse of subjective family law, which occurs when it clearly does not go beyond the established by the IC of Ukraine subjective right, in essence can be legitimate given the special nature and specifics of family relationships; 2) non-legalized abuse of subjective family law (inadmissible), which clearly goes beyond the scope of subjective law established by the IC of Ukraine, is illegal, i.e. violates the moral principles of society, contradicts the purpose of the right (abuse of parental rights – causing physical , mental, moral harm to the child). Conclusion. Thus, in contrast to existing publications in civil law doctrine, the author’s position is formulated that the abuse of subjective family law means the use of law in violation of its limits, which is manifested in unfair commission of family law legal actions that constitute a clearly defined content of subjective family law, in particular contrary to the purpose and moral principles of society.

Background. Studies of the internal nature of the categories of «human rights» and «human freedoms» in the context of information law are especially relevant, as information rights and human freedoms are currently being formed. Such research is timely for doctrinal and applied applications. Analysis of recent research and publications. Although the nature of the categories of «human rights» and «human freedoms» has been clarified in the works of scholars, there is no clear position in jurisprudence on the internal nature of these categories. The aim of the article is to study the internal nature of the categories of «human rights» and «human freedom», to distinguish between interpretations of such nature by doctrine and the legislator, to identify the impact on understanding the ontology of information rights and human freedoms. Materials and methods. The theoretical basis of the article are scientific works of scientists, normative – the Constitution of Ukraine and a number of laws of Ukraine, methodological – general scientific and special legal methods of cognition. Results. Positions are analyzed: a) complete denial of the existence of differences between the categories of «human rights» and «human freedom» (identification); b) differentiation of these categories by different criteria. Conclusion. The categories of «human rights» and «human freedoms» are different in their internal nature (human rights – proclaimed and limited by the state, have a mechanism for implementation, and human freedoms – are absolute and implemented under favorable social circumstances). The position of the legislator is the indivisibility of the categories of «human rights» and «human freedom». The term «human freedom» is used mainly in cases related to creativity, intellectual development, self-awareness and worldview. Common to all human rights and freedoms, the principle of understanding their internal nature by the legislator explains how the following categories are used in consolidating information rights and human freedoms: there is an analogy.

Background. Tax disputes are the most common and complex category of cases, so the formation of an effective mechanism for resolving them is a complex task, the solution of which involves the development of optimal legal forms that would provide reliable protection of the rights and legitimate interests of taxpayers in disputes with tax authorities. Problems of resolving tax disputes are relevant for all countries of the world, Ukraine is no exception. Therefore, the question of the effective functioning of the institutional and legal mechanism for resolving tax disputes in court requires a deep legal analysis. Analysis of recent research and publications has shown that, despite a significant amount of research, a range of issues on tax dispute settlement remains unresolved, in particular on the latest domestic trends in research on the organization and functioning of the institutional and legal mechanism for tax disputes in the US was not conducted in detail. The aim of the article is a comprehensive study of the organization and functioning of the institutional and legal mechanism for resolving tax disputes in the United States of America. Materials and methods. In the course of the study, the author considers the regulations governing the resolution of tax disputes in the United States and the practice of their application, namely U.S. Code (Code §?7421), (Code §?2201), The United States Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. The methodological basis of the study is general scientific and special legal methods of cognition. Results. Based on the approaches to resolving tax disputes in the United States, we can distinguish three aspects of the institutional and legal mechanism. The first aspect is a system of norms that regulate procedural relations for resolving tax disputes, as well as regulate the legal status of bodies dealing with tax disputes. The second is the system of bodies authorized to consider tax disputes. Such a system includes both administrative bodies dealing with tax disputes and judicial bodies. The third element is a system of procedures and methods for resolving tax disputes. Tax dispute resolution procedures in the U.S. Tax Court are systemic in nature and based on sources of special tax law. Conclusion. The institutional and legal mechanism for resolving tax disputes in the United States shows the balance of the system, which is a holistic mechanism for resolving tax disputes: the US Internal Revenue Service, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, and other authorities. largely determined by the peculiarities of the procedures. The existence of special courts to resolve tax disputes affects the development of procedural rules of tax law. These rules are of a jurisdictional nature, generated by the need to resolve the tax dispute; extend its activities to a special range of business entities, including, in addition to taxpayers, authorized bodies and their representatives. In this regard, further study of foreign experience of the institutional and legal mechanism for reviewing tax disputes may be appropriate in the domestic practice of protecting the rights of taxpayers in court.

Background. Tax disputes are the most common and complex category of cases, so the formation of an effective mechanism for resolving them is a complex task, the solution of which involves the development of optimal legal forms that would provide reliable protection of the rights and legitimate interests of taxpayers in disputes with tax authorities. Problems of resolving tax disputes are relevant for all countries of the world, Ukraine is no exception. Therefore, the question of the effective functioning of the institutional and legal mechanism for resolving tax disputes in court requires a deep legal analysis. Analysis of recent research and publications has shown that, despite a significant amount of research, a range of issues on tax dispute settlement remains unresolved, in particular on the latest domestic trends in research on the organization and functioning of the institutional and legal mechanism for tax disputes in the US was not conducted in detail. The aim of the article is a comprehensive study of the organization and functioning of the institutional and legal mechanism for resolving tax disputes in the United States of America. Materials and methods. In the course of the study, the author considers the regulations governing the resolution of tax disputes in the United States and the practice of their application, namely U.S. Code (Code §?7421), (Code §?2201), The United States Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. The methodological basis of the study is general scientific and special legal methods of cognition. Results. Based on the approaches to resolving tax disputes in the United States, we can distinguish three aspects of the institutional and legal mechanism. The first aspect is a system of norms that regulate procedural relations for resolving tax disputes, as well as regulate the legal status of bodies dealing with tax disputes. The second is the system of bodies authorized to consider tax disputes. Such a system includes both administrative bodies dealing with tax disputes and judicial bodies. The third element is a system of procedures and methods for resolving tax disputes. Tax dispute resolution procedures in the U.S. Tax Court are systemic in nature and based on sources of special tax law. Conclusion. The institutional and legal mechanism for resolving tax disputes in the United States shows the balance of the system, which is a holistic mechanism for resolving tax disputes: the US Internal Revenue Service, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, and other authorities. largely determined by the peculiarities of the procedures. The existence of special courts to resolve tax disputes affects the development of procedural rules of tax law. These rules are of a jurisdictional nature, generated by the need to resolve the tax dispute; extend its activities to a special range of business entities, including, in addition to taxpayers, authorized bodies and their representatives. In this regard, further study of foreign experience of the institutional and legal mechanism for reviewing tax disputes may be appropriate in the domestic practice of protecting the rights of taxpayers in court.

Background. In the context of Ukraine’s European integration, it is important to improve the legislation that determines the legal status of utilities to increase their profitability, reduce corruption risks and comply with European standards, which indicates the relevance of the research topic. Analysis of recent research and publications has shown that rapid changes in domestic legislation in the context of European integration cause the inevitability of the transformation of the legal status of utilities and require research on this topic. The aim of the article is to reveal the features of the legal status of utilities in the context of European integration and make suggestions for improving legislation in this area. Materials and methods. The study is based on current legislation, statistics, etc. The methodological basis of the research is general scientific and special methods of cognition, in particular dialectical, formal-logical, analysis and synthesis, system-structural, etc. Results. The transformation of the order of creation of communal enterprises (administrative for unitary and contractual for joint ones), modernization of the management system of communal unitary enterprises by the possibility of creating supervisory boards are pointed out. The legislation and practice of activity of supervisory boards of communal unitary enterprises are analyzed. Proposals have been made to improve the legislation governing the activities of communal unitary enterprises. Conclusion. The peculiarity of the legal status of communal unitary enterprises is determined by the following factors: their ownership by the territorial community; the order of creation; management system; the possibility of creating a supervisory board as a management and control body; legal regime of property; in order to create them.

Background. The draft law on the requirements for independent members of the supervisory boards of state-owned enterprises submitted by the People’s Deputy of Ukraine makes it impossible for foreigners to participate in the supervisory boards of a state-owned enterprise. The main requirements in the bill are citizenship, age, period of residence in Ukraine and knowledge of the state language, but there are no professional requirements. In this regard, it is worth conducting a study on the participation of foreigners in the supervisory boards of state-owned enterprises. An analysis of recent research and publications has shown that, despite the existence of scientific achievements, an important scientific and practical problem of participation of foreigners in the supervisory boards of state-owned enterprises has not yet been fully explored. The purpose of the article – is the participation of foreigners in the supervisory board of state enterprises. Materials and methods. In the course of the research general and special methods of cognition of legal phenomena and processes were used: dialectical, system approach, formal-logical, generalization, comparative jurisprudence. The information base of the article is the constitutional, corporate and economic legislation of Ukraine, the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, the works of domestic scientists. Results. A study of current legislation, the practice of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, scientific work on the participation of foreigners in the supervisory boards of state enterprises. According to the results of the study, the participation of foreigners in the supervisory boards of state enterprises is due to the need to disseminate the experience of effective corporate governance. Secondly, Ukrainian legislation does not prohibit the participation of foreigners in the supervisory boards of state enterprises. Thirdly, the participation of foreigners in the supervisory boards of state-owned enterprises does not pose a threat to Ukraine’s national danger, as under certain conditions foreigners may even be admitted to state secrets. But information about the activities of a state-owned enterprise is not a state secret. Conclusion. The state is a guarantor of equal protection of all economic entities, regardless of ownership. All subjects of property rights are equal before the law in exercising their rights and obligations. In this regard, foreigners have the same rights and obligations as citizens of Ukraine. The appointment of foreigners to the supervisory board of a state unitary enterprise is not a threat to the national security of Ukraine. Information on the activities of such a state-owned enterprise is not information with limited access, on the contrary, state-owned enterprises are obliged to publish information on their financial and economic activities annually. There are no restrictions in the legislation of Ukraine on the appointment of foreigners to the supervisory boards of state unitary enterprises. It is impossible to agree with the proposals contained in the draft Law ? 3487 of 15.05.2020 on the requirements for candidates for the position of an independent member of the Supervisory Board.

Background. As of today, there is no effective legal mechanism for the bankruptcy of state-owned enterprises in Ukraine, as the ECtHR has repeatedly stated in its decisions. The problem is due to the legal prohibition of liquidation and rehabilitation of such enterprises, as well as the fact that creditors do not have any other tools to protect their rights in Ukraine and are forced to apply to the ECtHR as a last resort. Ultimately, the reality in Ukraine today is that, in practice, the rights of creditors of state-owned enterprises have not been guaranteed or protected by national courts for decades, and isolated appeals to the ECtHR do not solve this problem in general. The aim of the article is to outline specific legislative problems of bankruptcy of state-owned enterprises, as well as to develop proposals for further improvement of the organizational bases of bankruptcy of state-owned enterprises. Materials and methods. The theoretical basis of the article was the scientific works of scientists from different fields of law, who in one way or another investigated the problems of the bankruptcy of state-owned enterprises in Ukraine. The philosophical methods of cognition (dialectical, hermeneutic), general scientific (analysis and synthesis, system-structural, modeling, abstraction, formal-logical, historical) are used and special methods used in jurisprudence (methods of interpreting the rules of law, legal-dogmatic, comparative legal). Results. An analytical analysis of the existing mechanism of bankruptcy of state-owned enterprises in Ukraine after the reform of legislation in 2018 and the adoption of a qualitatively new Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures is conducted. Specific problems of the legislation of Ukraine which make impossible the effective legal mechanism of bankruptcy of the state enterprises in Ukraine are outlined. Further directions of improvement of organizational bases of bankruptcy of the state enterprises in Ukraine are offered. Conclusion. The Bankruptcy Procedure Code of Ukraine makes the reorganization of a state-owned enterprise and the sale of the property of a bankrupt state-owned enterprise subject to the political will of the representatives of the bodies authorized to manage the respective state-owned enterprise. The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, as well as the central executive bodies, do not prevent the bankruptcy of state-owned enterprises by their policies and actions. In Ukraine, this problem is extremely acute because, on the one hand, there is objectively no state support for state-owned enterprises that are insolvent, but on the other hand, courts and arbitration trustees cannot eliminate or restore the solvency (reorganization procedure) of state-owned enterprises through legislation. obstacles.

Background. The extensive system of central executive bodies in Ukraine needs to be improved in general, in particular with regard to the implementation of coordination relations. Analysis of recent research and publications. The issue of coordination at the level of central executive bodies has been studied in recent years by scientists only in certain areas, therefore, our attention is paid to finding ways to improve coordination activities at the level of central executive bodies. The aim of this article is to define the essence of the concept of «coordination», the study of regulatory support for coordination activities at the level of central executive bodies and ways to improve it. Materials and methods. The study is based on special legislation in this area using general scientific and special legal methods of cognition. Results. The essence of coordination is to establish relationships between the elements of the system of executive bodies. The coordination function is an integral part of public administration and ensures the orderliness of the system. Coordination, as a management function, is one of the main powers of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, as it directs and coordinates the work of central executive bodies. In order to organize interaction and coordination of bodies at the central level, there is a need for clear subordination. As of today, the subordination of certain state services, state agencies, and state inspections to the relevant ministers of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine is clearly defined. It is worth emphasizing the differences in the number of bodies whose activities are coordinated by the Minister, which affects the workload and quality of management. Conclusion. In our opinion, it is necessary to review the powers of public services in order to avoid duplication, as well as to reduce the number of management bodies, for example, by transferring inspection functions to public organizations, which will relieve government bodies and provide more attention to strategic issues.

Background. The Government-endorsed Concept of State Policy for Consumer Protection by 2020 recognizes the need to reform a consumer protection system that has lost its control and is not acting in the interests of the multi-million consumer community. Governments are being chaned, but no one is paying attention to this problem, which exacerbates the situation in the country and leads to more active actions and consumer demands: there are no constitutional guarantees for state protection of legitimate consumer rights; there is no effective state body for consumer protection, independent from industrial interests; there is no national system for handling consumer complaints and compensation for violations of rights and illegal actions, resulting in consumers of Ukraine being unprotected and virtually disenfranchised against the dishonest actions of certain authorities and economic entities. Analysis of recent researches and publications. The legal problems of the consumer protection system were investigated. However, their works did not propose specific mechanisms for introducing alternative ways of resolving consumer disputes. The aim. Legal analysis of the grounds for introducing alternative ways of resolving consumer-related disputes, based on an analysis of best European practices. Materials and methods. General and specific research methods were used to elaborate on the topic outlined. Results. The state function of «consumer protection», enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine and fundamental international and European consumer protection instruments ratified in Ukraine, has become declarative and, as a consequence, consumers are deprived of an accessible, effective and impartial mechanism for protecting their rights. The state should provide, in addition to the generally accepted (state) mechanisms of protection, also alternative ways for fair, urgent, unreated to significant costs -settling disputes and obtaining consumer legal protection. Europe-wide practice demonstrates effective approaches to alternative ways of resolving consumer policy disputes. In view of the current situation regarding inefficient state mechanisms for consumer protection in Ukraine, the German experience of alternative ways of resolving consumer disputes is analyzed, as exemplified by Schlichtunqgsstelle fur den öffentlichen Personen verkehre.V. (Söp), which is an Independent Consumer arbitration Comission. Here we have analysed Söp’s work on the out-of-court settlement of individual disputes between travelers as consumers and companies in the transport and tourism sectors which can show us the great mechanisms of solving above-mentioned problems. Conclusion. In Ukraine, one of the most effective and promising areas in the field of consumer protection should be the introduction (normalization) of a system of alternative ways of resolving consumer disputes. We are convinced that our state should offer the option of choosing the consumer’s remedy, and provide a mechanism for resolving disputes through alternative means that will allow parties to avoid state litigation (going to court is preferable to use as an exclusive way of settling a legal dispute).