Nowadays the objective of strengthening scientific and technological bases is not only the goal of individual states but an objective of integration organisations as well. Both European and Eurasian legal systems consider competition a key element for economical and technological development. Rivalry between various research institutes is an essential driver of economic and scientific efficiency, in absence of which the dominant undertaking would lack adequate incentives to continue to create. Sometimes further technological development is impossible without an access to technological solutions owned by dominant undertaking refusing to grant such access. In this case it is necessary to find a due balance between intellectual property rights of such owing undertaking and necessity of requesting company. The EU case law developed a test allowing to asses whether the refusal to make a deal granting an access to a new technology complies with EU law or amounts an abuse of a dominant position. This paper deals with key elements of this test – i.e. (1) the refusal must be likely to eliminate all competition in the market on the part of the person requesting the service; (2) the refusal must be incapable of being objectively justified; (3) the service in itself must be indispensable to sustain the business; (4) there must exist no actual or potential substitute for the service in question – and studies perspectives of using the same test within Eurasian Economic Union.

如今，加强科技基础的目标不仅是个别国家的目标，也是整合组织的目标。欧洲和欧亚法律体系都认为竞争是经济和技术发展的关键因素。不同研究机构之间的竞争是经济和科学效率的重要驱动力，如果没有这种竞争，主导企业将缺乏继续创造的足够动力。有时，如果无法获得拒绝授予此类访问权的主导企业所拥有的技术解决方案，则不可能进行进一步的技术开发。在这种情况下，有必要在该欠款承诺的知识产权与请求公司的必要性之间找到适当的平衡。欧盟判例法制定了一项测试，允许评估拒绝达成一项授予新技术使用权的交易是否符合欧盟法律或是否构成滥用支配地位。本文讨论了该测试的关键要素——即（1）拒绝必须可能消除请求服务的人在市场上的所有竞争；(2) 拒绝必须没有客观理由；(3) 服务本身必须是维持业务所不可或缺的；(4) 所讨论的服务必须不存在实际或潜在的替代品——并研究在欧亚经济联盟内使用相同测试的观点。本文讨论了该测试的关键要素——即（1）拒绝必须可能消除请求服务的人在市场上的所有竞争；(2) 拒绝必须没有客观理由；(3) 服务本身必须是维持业务所不可或缺的；(4) 所讨论的服务必须不存在实际或潜在的替代品——并研究在欧亚经济联盟内使用相同测试的观点。本文讨论了该测试的关键要素——即（1）拒绝必须可能消除请求服务的人在市场上的所有竞争；(2) 拒绝必须没有客观理由；(3) 服务本身必须是维持业务所不可或缺的；(4) 所讨论的服务必须不存在实际或潜在的替代品——并研究在欧亚经济联盟内使用相同测试的观点。