LEGAL REGULATION OF NATIONALIZATION

The article discusses the issues of latent and direct nationalization (eminent domain) in the Ukrainian economy, foreign use of nationalization, e. g. in the United States of America (USA), the French Republic, the Republic of Kazakhstan. In particular, the active participation of jurors in the nationalization procedure in the United States, examples of effective use of nationalization in the French Republic, and the comprehensive law of the Republic of Kazakhstan on state property. Theoretical and empirical basis for this study were the scientific definitions of nationalization, submitted to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine bills, current regulations, which indirectly indicate the forced transfer of ownership from a private entity to the state. The authorial definition of the concept of nationalization is offered, but in modern conditions of market economy and democratic political regime. Given the regulatory importance of nationalization (as well as privatization) for the economy, it is stated that before nationalization it is necessary to prepare a forecast of socio-economic consequences, and nationalization itself should be appropriate, adequate, effective, balanced, predictable, transparent and take into account public opinion, comply with the legal economic regime. The structure of legal relations on nationalization is considered: subjects, object, rights, and duties. The role of the employees and administration for positioning the business entity as an active participant and not a passive object of legal relations is considered. The possibility of applying other agreements during the nationalization of the business entity, except as a contract of sale, namely: rent and lifetime maintenance, are considered. Ways to improve the efficiency of resolving the issue of returning privatized enterprises to state ownership and the application of the institution of operational and economic sanctions in privatization agreements are proposed. The currently available ways to protect the rights and legitimate interests in the nationalization procedure are analyzed. E.g. it is proposed to extend the institution of property liability insurance to cases of expropriation, as currently nationalization and expropriation are classified by insurers as non-insured events.