Oleh Trokhymchuk

Attorney at Law, Counsel, Co-Head of Dispute Resolution Practice at Ilyashev & Partners Law Firm

Vyacheslav Sytyi

Attorney at Law, Counsel at Ilyashev & Partners Law Firm

In 2024, Ukrainian courts across all jurisdictions and instances, including the Supreme Court, once again recorded a significant increase in the number of cases filed. Even amidst the ongoing full-scale war, the country continues to attract considerable foreign investment across key sectors such as infrastructure reconstruction, the defence industry, energy, agriculture, IT, etc. These developments reinforce Ukraine’s role not only as a recipient of foreign capital but also as a vital forum for the resolution of disputes that inevitably arise in the context of international commerce.

Role of Ukrainian Courts in Resolving Cross-Border Disputes

Ukrainian courts play a central role in ensuring access to justice for both domestic and foreign businesses. They remain operational and functional despite wartime challenges, providing an institutional framework for adjudicating cross-border disputes. This resilience underscores the judiciary’s importance in maintaining the rule of law and protecting commercial interests under extraordinary circumstances.

The scope of cross-border disputes in Ukraine is broad and diverse. Typical cases include the protection of foreign investments and recovery of investment-related losses; enforcement of contractual obligations, particularly where counterparties invoke force majeure; recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards; challenges to domestic regulatory measures such as sanctions; and claims for damages against the aggressor state.

At the same time, the category of commercial disputes with a foreign element remains relatively limited, as international investors commonly establish legal entities under Ukrainian law, with their disputes therefore falling within the jurisdiction of national courts.

For international companies, engaging in litigation or enforcement proceedings in Ukraine requires more than a general understanding of the country’s legal framework. Success depends on navigating three key aspects: jurisdiction, dispute resolution strategy, and enforcement mechanisms. Given the rapidly evolving legal environment and the broader geopolitical context, a clear understanding of these elements is not merely useful but essential. For foreign businesses, effective dispute resolution in Ukraine depends on anticipating procedural complexities, aligning legal strategy with commercial objectives, and leveraging the developing practice of Ukrainian courts in cross-border matters.

Structure of the Courts

National courts offer several advantages: a clear institutional structure, a three-tier system of appeals, and comprehensive procedural codes that ensure predictability and consistency in adjudication.

Ukraine’s judiciary is organised on the principles of specialisation, territoriality, and hierarchy. Courts are specialised to hear civil, criminal, commercial, and administrative cases, as well as matters concerning administrative offences. The judiciary is structured into three main branches:

  • Commercial courts – the principal forum for cross-border disputes in Ukraine. These courts specialise in business-related disputes involving legal entities and individual entrepreneurs. Their jurisdiction also covers categories of cases expressly assigned by law, including corporate disputes, bankruptcy, and insolvency proceedings.
  • Administrative courts handle disputes involving state authorities or regulators. Their jurisdiction is particularly relevant for foreign investors in matters such as disputes with tax and customs authorities, challenges to sanctions, licensing and regulatory issues, and claims arising from state intervention in business activities.
  • Courts of general jurisdiction hear disputes involving individuals and legal entities that fall outside the competence of commercial or administrative courts. They also handle the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards, which makes them an important forum for cross-border disputes.

Local, Appellate, and the Supreme Court

The judicial system is structured into three levels: local courts (first instance), appellate courts, and the Supreme Court. Certain categories of cases are heard by higher specialized courts operating within this system.

  • Local courts (courts of first instance) – the entry point for most disputes, examining cases on their merits and establishing the factual and legal basis for further proceedings.
  • Appellate courts review first-instance decisions to ensure the correct application of the law and the proper resolution of the dispute.
  • The Supreme Court – the highest judicial body in Ukraine, responsible for ensuring consistency of case law and unifying judicial practice.

Commercial disputes are usually heard by the commercial courts of first instance. Commercial courts of appeal review these decisions, while the Supreme Court reviews the decisions of courts of first and appellate instances.

The Supreme Court is divided into four cassation courts, each containing specialised chambers: Commercial Cassation Court – focuses on complex business and cross-border commercial disputes; Administrative Cassation Court – handles tax, customs, regulatory, and sanctions-related matters; Civil Cassation Court – resolves disputes involving individuals, including employment, consumer, and family matters; Criminal Cassation Court – less relevant for most commercial disputes but important in cases involving compliance, fraud, and white-collar crime.

Combining specialisation and hierarchical review, such a structure provides predictability and expertise in the resolution of disputes. Understanding the roles of each branch and level of the judiciary is essential when navigating cross-border and commercial litigation in Ukraine.

Determination of Jurisdiction in Commercial and Civil Disputes

When dealing with cross-border disputes, parties must carefully assess whether Ukrainian courts have jurisdiction and how far contractual clauses (e.g., arbitration clauses) may restrict access to them.

Jurisdiction in Ukraine is determined by four main factors: subject matter, parties involved, instance, and territorial competence.

Subject-matter jurisdiction allocates cases to the correct branch of the judiciary, civil (general), commercial, or administrative, depending on the nature of the dispute and the parties involved. As mentioned, commercial courts generally hear disputes arising out of business activities between legal entities or individual entrepreneurs. They also have exclusive jurisdiction over certain categories, including corporate disputes involving Ukrainian legal entities and insolvency proceedings. By contrast, disputes involving claims against natural persons typically fall within the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction, which also have competence to recognise and enforce foreign judgments and arbitral awards, irrespective of the parties involved.

Most disputes are heard by first-instance courts. However, matters concerning the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, as well as challenges to such awards, fall within the competence of appellate courts of general jurisdiction, which in these cases act as courts of first instance. As a rule, courts of appeal review, in appellate proceedings, the judgments of local commercial courts within their respective appellate districts, while the Supreme Court reviews, in cassation proceedings, the judgments rendered by both first-instance and appellate courts.

Territorial jurisdiction is usually determined by the registered address of the defendant, which ensures predictability for claimants. However, Ukrainian law also sets out exclusive territorial rules: disputes over real estate must be heard where the property is located, corporate disputes must be litigated in the court at the place where the company is registered, and insolvency proceedings must be initiated at the place of the debtor’s registration. In cross-border disputes, additional grounds apply: if a foreign defendant has no registered presence in Ukraine, jurisdiction may be established where the defendant’s assets are located.

Interaction of Ukrainian Courts with International Arbitration

If the parties in an agreement have provided to submit to arbitration all or any disputes arising or that may arise between them in respect of a defined legal relationship, whether contractual or not, concerning a subject matter capable of settlement by arbitration, the New York Convention obliges each contracting state to recognize such an agreement.

Given this, Ukrainian courts have a pro-arbitration approach and respect the parties’ choice of a dispute resolution clause if validly included in the main contract. This approach was confirmed in the Supreme Court decision in case No. 910/3208/22, dated 01 November 2023, and others. The legal framework is primarily set out in the Law of Ukraine on International Commercial Arbitration, alongside the Civil Procedural Code and the Commercial Procedural Code.

Ukrainian courts recognise and enforce foreign arbitral awards (see, for example, the Supreme Court decision in case No. 824/55/23, dated 21 December 2023), hear cases concerning challenges to arbitral awards (see, for example, the Supreme Court decision in case No. 824/83/22, dated 12 January 2023), uphold valid arbitration agreements and stay court proceedings in favour of arbitration (see, for example, the Supreme Court decision in case No. 924/497/22, dated 03 May 2023). When considering enforcement, courts focus solely on the enforceability of the award and potential grounds for refusal under Article V of the New York Convention, without reassessing the merits of the dispute (see, for example, the Supreme Court decision in case No. 824/55/23, dated 21 December 2023).

Throughout 2024, Ukrainian courts continued to reinforce a pro-arbitration approach. Key trends included:

  • a stronger focus on clarifying the legal nature of arbitration agreements;
  • an increase in court cases concerning the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in the defense-industrial sector;
  • a narrower interpretation of the concept of “public policy”;
  • further restrictions on judicial interference when reviewing arbitral awards, with an emphasis on the inadmissibility of improper court intervention.

Recent Ukrainian court practice is increasingly consistent with international arbitration standards, while domestic legislation is regularly amended to address the practical needs of international arbitration.

Case Snapshot

Ilyashev & Partners successfully represented the award creditor JKX Oil & Gas PLC both in the Supreme Court and in Kyiv Court of Appeal in a proceeding for the recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award in Ukraine and further before the State Treasury Service of Ukraine and a state bailiff.

The losses were incurred as a result of violation by Ukraine of its commitments under the Agreement between the Government of Ukraine and the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on Promotion and Mutual Protection of Investments signed on 10 February 1993.

On 21 November 2019 the Supreme Court upheld the Decision of Kyiv Court of Appeal on recognition and enforcement in Ukraine of the Arbitral Award (Permanent Court of Arbitration Case no. 2015-11) dated 6 February 2017 on the recovery by Ukraine of losses exceeding USD 12 mln in favor of JKX Oil & Gas Plc.

Language of Proceedings

The official language of court proceedings in Ukraine is Ukrainian. This rule applies equally in commercial, civil, and administrative proceedings, and there are no exceptions for foreign parties.

At the same time, the law ensures that parties who are not fluent in Ukrainian are not disadvantaged. They are guaranteed the right to participate fully in proceedings, including making statements, giving testimony, presenting legal arguments, and filing motions in their native language or another language they are comfortable with. To make this possible, the court will allow the involvement of a qualified interpreter, so that the official record remains in Ukrainian while the party can freely exercise its procedural rights.

All procedural documents, submissions, and evidence must be provided in Ukrainian to be admitted by the court. Foreign-language documents must be accompanied by an official certified translation into Ukrainian. In certain cases, documents issued abroad may also need to undergo legalisation or apostille before they can be used in Ukrainian proceedings.

Challenges for Cross-Border Disputes

For foreign parties, translation costs and timeframes can be considerable, particularly in document-heavy cases such as investment disputes, insolvency proceedings, or claims involving extensive contractual documentation. The accuracy of translations is equally critical: even minor inconsistencies in terminology or factual descriptions may affect how the court interprets a party’s position.

In practice, Ukrainian courts tend to grant parties sufficient time to arrange translations, particularly in cross-border disputes where large volumes of evidence originate from outside the jurisdiction. Nonetheless, effective case management requires planning, budgeting for certification, translation, and interpretation services, and close coordination with professional translators who specialise in legal proceedings.

Timeframes for Case Proceedings

Established Procedural Deadlines in Civil and Commercial Cases

Ukrainian procedural codes establish relatively short statutory deadlines for the examination of civil and commercial disputes. First instance courts are required to resolve cases within 30–120 days, while appeals and cassation reviews should be resolved within 30–60 days.

In practice, cases before courts of general jurisdiction are resolved more slowly than in commercial courts, given their considerably heavier workload.

According to the President of the Commercial Cassation Court, the average duration of a commercial dispute from filing to the final cassation decision is approximately eight months.

Average Case Duration and Factors Affecting It

Statistical data for 2022–2024 confirms that the average timeframe from the first instance to cassation review is around 235 days, compared to 160–180 days before the full-scale war. The increase is primarily attributable to wartime disruptions, such as air raid alerts, logistical complications, and the need to ensure proper notification of parties.

According to official statistics, in 2024, commercial courts of first instance resolved cases in an average of 86 days (89 days in 2023), while commercial courts of appeal took an average of 80 days.

At the cassation level, the average duration of the cassation review is about 69 days. Moreover, in most commercial cases the first hearing takes place within a month from the opening of cassation proceedings, and often results in a final judgment. Only more complex disputes, including those referred to the Joint Chamber or the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, take longer.

Despite these relatively efficient averages, it is important to note that case timelines may increase where:

  • the dispute is legally complex or supported by a substantial body of evidence;
  • the matter is politically sensitive;
  • there are numerous parties involved;
  • a party abuses procedural rights by failing to appear at hearings, disregarding court orders, filing unfounded motions, submitting repetitive applications, or appealing decisions that are not subject to appeal;
  • expert examinations, extensive witness testimony, proper notification of foreign participants, or the application of foreign law are required.

For foreign litigants, additional time may also be needed to comply with procedural formalities, including translation of documents into Ukrainian, apostille or consular legalization, and notarisation.

Case duration is also affected by objective factors such as:

  • the caseload of a specific court (with the heaviest workloads on average reported in the commercial courts of Kyiv, Mykolaiv, and Sumy regions);
  • insufficient judicial staffing (for example, in 2024, the highest average workload among commercial courts of appeal was in the Central Commercial Court of Appeal, where only nine judges were involved in court proceedings. Its performance indicators show that there are not enough judges to handle a significant number of cases, which may have negative consequences in the near future);
  • wartime disruptions, particularly frequent air raid alerts, which often lead to adjournments and rescheduling of hearings.

While statutory deadlines in Ukraine are ambitious, commercial cases are generally resolved within less than a year, which is comparable to or faster than timelines in many other jurisdictions. However, it should be noted that proceedings involving foreign elements typically take longer than average and may last even a couple of years.

The Supreme Court and Case Law

The Role of the Supreme Court in Ensuring the Uniformity of Judicial Practice

The Supreme Court is the highest judicial authority in Ukraine and performs the key function of ensuring uniformity in judicial practice. It consists of cassation courts in civil, commercial, administrative, and criminal cases, as well as the Grand Chamber, which considers the most fundamental issues. Such a structure enables the harmonization of decisions across various areas of law and ensures stability for participants in legal relations.

The main mechanism for ensuring uniformity is the legal conclusions in the rulings of the Supreme Court, which are binding on lower courts. This reduces the risk of contradictory decisions in similar cases and creates predictability for businesses. In addition, the Supreme Court has the authority to depart from previous positions if the socio-economic context changes or new challenges arise, for example, in the field of international trade or sanctions.

For companies, including foreign ones, it is important to have a consistent and predictable judicial practice. This allows for more accurate risk assessment, the consideration of possible outcomes in contracts, and the avoidance of unforeseen costs. The Supreme Court, in fact, performs the function of a stabilizer of the Ukrainian justice system, bringing it closer to the standards of the international business environment.

Business interacts with the Supreme Court primarily through the mechanism of cassation appeals provided by procedural codes. If lower courts have misapplied legal norms, companies may obtain the final interpretation of such norms precisely from the Supreme Court. Moreover, the Supreme Court publishes summaries and reviews of practice, which help lawyers and investors monitor key trends and navigate law enforcement.

Thus, the Supreme Court not only completes the judicial process but also shapes the rules of the game for the entire business environment. Its function as guarantor of unity ensures stability, which is a critical condition for the development of domestic and international investment in Ukraine.

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court is a special collegial body that brings together representatives of all cassation jurisdictions. Its creation was envisaged by judicial reform in order to ensure consistency of approaches in cases where different interpretations of law or conflicts between jurisdictions arise. It is essentially an “arbiter among arbiters,” which determines the final position on contentious issues.

Referral to the Grand Chamber occurs in cases where it is necessary to depart from a previously established legal position or to resolve contradictions between the decisions of different cassation courts. In other words, this body creates stable standards of law enforcement, which then become a benchmark for the entire judicial system.

The significance of the decisions of the Grand Chamber is particularly great in categories of cases where businesses face ambiguity in legal regulation: corporate conflicts, jurisdictional disputes, recognition of foreign judgments, and application of sanctions. The decisions of the Grand Chamber cannot be appealed and have the highest authority, which guarantees finality and predictability.

For foreign investors, this means that if their dispute reaches the Grand Chamber, its resolution will have not only individual but also systemic significance for the entire legal practice. This creates an additional level of protection and stability for those operating in Ukraine in complex or high-risk business areas.

Thus, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court is a key element in ensuring the uniformity of judicial practice, and its decisions establish long-term standards that can be relied upon by both national and international companies.

The Supreme Court’s Practice for Cross-Border Disputes

For international business, cross-border disputes are the most sensitive category, as they demonstrate whether the national judicial system can effectively integrate into the global legal space.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly confirmed its commitment to international standards. In particular, in cases concerning the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, courts are obliged to apply the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York, 1958). Specifically, in its ruling of 28 July 2022 in case No. 824/191/21 (regarding the enforcement of an arbitral award), the Supreme Court emphasized that Ukrainian courts have no right to review the merits of the dispute but only to examine the formal grounds for refusal provided by the Convention. This ensures predictability for foreign companies that choose arbitration as a mechanism for dispute resolution.

Another example is jurisdictional clauses in international contracts. The Supreme Court has established an approach whereby Ukrainian courts must respect the parties’ agreements on the choice of a foreign court or arbitration. If a contract contains such a clause, proceedings in Ukraine must be closed. This is consistent with European practice and guarantees that the parties’ agreements will be upheld in Ukraine.

In corporate and investment disputes, the Supreme Court consistently upholds Ukraine’s jurisdiction in cases where the subject matter of the dispute is assets or corporate rights located on Ukrainian territory, even if one of the parties is a foreign company. This approach clearly delineates the boundaries of national jurisdiction and allows businesses to predict where exactly a dispute will be considered.

Thus, the practice of the Supreme Court and the Grand Chamber in cross-border disputes demonstrates a balance between Ukraine’s international obligations (the New York Convention, investment treaties) and national interests. For foreign investors, this means that Ukraine has an established legal protection mechanism that takes into account both global standards and the specific features of the Ukrainian legal order.

Case Snapshot

Ilyashev & Partners has successfully defended the arbitral awards of China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC, Shanghai) in the Supreme Court in favor of J.S. Corrugating Machinery Co., Ltd – one of the largest China-based manufacturers of packaging machines.

In 2020, the Supreme Court granted permission to J.S. Corrugating Machinery Co., Ltd to enforce the arbitral award issued by CIETAC for the recovery of over USD 5 million, plus interest and arbitration fees from the Ukrainian debtor South Cardboard LLC. The debt arose as a result of breaching by the Ukrainian company of its obligations under the equipment supply contract.

In 2019, an arbitral award issued in favor of this client in Shenzhen in connection with the debt of another Ukrainian company was recognized in Ukraine. In that case, the Supreme Court upheld the Ruling of Kyiv Court of Appeal for the recognition and enforcement of the award.

Conclusions and Practical Advice

Key Recommendations for Foreign Companies Planning to Litigate in Ukraine

  • Procedural specifics of the judicial system. In Ukraine, it is necessary to take into account the procedural specifics of the judicial system. All documents must be submitted in Ukrainian with an official translation, and, if necessary, with an apostille or consular legalization. Failure to comply with these formal requirements may lead to delays in proceedings or even refusal to consider the case.
  • Compliance with procedural deadlines. Ukrainian courts strictly monitor time limits, and missing even one of them can significantly complicate a company’s position. Therefore, it is necessary to plan the time for preparing materials and responding to court requirements.
  • Particular attention should be paid to the evidence base. The Ukrainian system is largely oriented toward written materials, and properly prepared documents often have decisive importance for the outcome of a case.
  • Terms of litigation in Ukraine. Companies should also take into account that litigation can be lengthy, especially considering consideration in three instances. Therefore, it is important to provide for an adequate budget and resources.
  • Engagement of local counsel. According to Ukrainian law, representation in courts is carried out exclusively by attorneys entered in the Unified Register of Attorneys of Ukraine. This means that a foreign company cannot conduct proceedings on its own and must engage local counsel.

The Importance of Engaging Experienced Local Counsel

The role of local counsel goes far beyond formal representation. They possess in-depth knowledge of the current judicial practice of the Supreme Court and the Grand Chamber, are well-versed in complex procedural nuances, and understand which arguments are most persuasive for Ukrainian courts. Such expertise is important for avoiding typical mistakes that often lead to claims being denied.

In addition, Ukrainian attorneys have practical experience in preparing and organizing evidence, timely responding to court requirements, and clarifying procedural documents. They ensure the proper preparation of materials and quickly adapt to additional requirements that often arise during the process.

This not only reduces risks but also significantly saves time and optimizes costs for foreign companies. As a result, engaging an experienced Ukrainian team becomes a key factor in effectively protecting interests in litigation in Ukraine.

In litigation in Ukraine, the result often depends not only on the substance of the dispute but also on the proper observance of procedures. Professional legal support minimizes these risks and increases the chances of a positive outcome.

How Professional Legal Support Can Reduce Risks and Increase Chances of Success

Many cases are lost not on the merits but due to formal procedural shortcomings, including missed deadlines, incorrect translations, or improperly prepared documents. Professional support ensures that all documents are submitted in accordance with the requirements of procedural codes.

Usually, experienced counsel build arguments based on the legal positions of the Supreme Court and the Grand Chamber. Without knowledge of such changes, a foreign company risks building its strategy on outdated norms.

Professional support also makes it possible to determine in a timely manner whether it is worth pursuing the case to the end or whether it is more advantageous to use mediation or a settlement agreement. For example, in corporate conflicts, Ukrainian courts often encourage parties to settle, and attorneys know when such a step will save resources without harming the outcome.

Lawyers help businesses realistically assess prospects: what costs to expect, what risks exist, and which steps will have the greatest effect. This makes it possible to avoid unforeseen financial losses and to make informed decisions regarding further strategy.

Thus, professional legal support in Ukraine is not only a matter of formal access to court but also a key factor of success. It guarantees compliance with procedures, the relevance of arguments, and risk management, which together significantly increase the chances of foreign companies for a positive result in complex cross-border disputes.

Ilyashev & Partners is a top-tier Ukrainian law firm, widely recognised for its dispute resolution, international arbitration, and cross-border litigation practice. Our team represents foreign investors, multinational corporations, and international financial institutions in the most complex cases before Ukrainian courts of all levels, including the Supreme Court and the Grand Chamber.

We have successfully handled recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards (including PCA, ICC, LCIA, SCC, CIETAC, ICSID), investment treaty disputes, commercial litigation, and sanctions-related proceedings. With unparalleled experience in cross-border insolvency, corporate conflicts, tax and customs disputes, and defence-sector litigation, we combine deep knowledge of Ukrainian procedural law with international standards of due process.

Our lawyers are trusted for their strategic approach to enforcement in Ukraine, their proven ability to protect clients against procedural abuses, and their record of success in multi-jurisdictional disputes and white-collar investigations. By engaging Ilyashev & Partners, foreign businesses secure not only reliable representation in Ukraine but also seamless cooperation with global counsel, ensuring business continuity, asset protection, and reputational safeguards.

To learn more, please visit the Ilyashev & Partners Law Firm website.