Investment Treaty Arbitration

Ukraine has consistently demonstrated a welcoming attitude towards foreign investment, recognising it as a crucial driver for economic growth, modernisation, and integration into the global economy. Legally, this positive stance is embodied in a comprehensive framework designed to protect foreign investors and provide a stable, transparent, and favourable investment climate. The primary legislation governing foreign investment includes the following:

• the Constitution of Ukraine;
• investment laws (Law of Ukraine "On the Regime of Foreign Investment", Law "On Protection of Foreign Investments in Ukraine" and Law "On State Support for Investment Projects with Significant Investments in Ukraine"); and
• bilateral investment treaties (BITs).

Ukraine's legal system provides a structured framework to regulate foreign investments, ensuring both the protection and promotion of investor rights. Key components include the following:

• non-discrimination principle: foreign investors are granted national treatment, meaning they are treated no less favourably than domestic investors;
• expropriation protections: expropriation is prohibited unless in exceptional cases for public necessity, under due legal process, and with prompt, adequate compensation;
• repatriation rights: investors have the right to freely repatriate profits, dividends, and capital, subject to compliance with Ukrainian currency regulations;
• legal stability guarantees: a 10-year guarantee under the Law "On the Regime of Foreign Investment" against changes in special foreign investment legislation, and protection from adverse regulatory changes for up to 15 years under agreements concluded pursuant to the Law "On State Support for Investment Projects with Significant Investments in Ukraine"; and
• dispute resolution mechanisms: investors can seek recourse through domestic courts or international arbitration under BITs, offering multiple avenues for resolving conflicts.

Ukraine has entered into numerous BITs with more than 70 countries. These treaties typically provide the following:

• fair and equitable treatment (FET): ensuring a stable and predictable legal environment;
• most-favoured-nation (MFN) treatment: preventing less favourable treatment compared to investors from other countries; and
• dispute resolution mechanisms: allowing investors to settle disputes through international arbitration (eg, ICSID, UNCITRAL).

Additionally, Ukraine is a signatory to multilateral agreements that impact foreign investment such as the Energy Charter Treaty, which facilitates investments in the energy sector and the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (ICSID Convention), which provides a framework for resolving investment disputes.
 

While there is cautious optimism regarding foreign investments in Ukraine due to the prospects of a post-war reconstruction, recent increases in foreign direct investment (FDI), and government initiatives to attract capital, significant challenges related to security risks and regulatory instability persist. The World Bank estimates that Ukraine's economic recovery will require almost US$588 billion, highlighting the urgent need for substantial foreign investment to rebuild infrastructure and stimulate growth. Achieving this will depend on improving the overall investment climate.

One of the key vehicles for attracting investment into Ukraine is the United States–Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, established jointly by the governments of Ukraine and the United States in 2025 to support Ukraine’s reconstruction and long-term economic development. The Fund identifies the following priority sectors:

• natural resources: exploration, extraction, processing and value-added production of ukraine's significant mineral resources;
• energy: conventional and renewable energy, generation, storage and energy infrastructure;
• information and communication technologies: software development, digital services, telecommunications, cybersecurity and other technology-driven industries;
• transportation and logistics: roads, railways, ports, logistics hubs and related infrastructure; and
• strategic and emerging technologies: advanced technologies and industries of strategic importance and high growth potential.

In addition, several other sectors remain attractive to foreign investors:

• agriculture and agribusiness: farming, food processing, storage, agricultural technology, and export-oriented production;
• manufacturing and heavy industry: machinery, automotive manufacturing, metallurgy and industrial modernisation;
• infrastructure and construction: reconstruction of residential, commercial, municipal and utility infrastructure; and
• pharmaceuticals and healthcare: pharmaceutical manufacturing, medical equipment and healthcare services.

According to the National Bank of Ukraine's official FDI statistics, Ukraine recorded a net inflow of foreign direct investment of US$716 million in the first quarter of 2026. In 2025 as a whole, net FDI inflows amounted to approximately US$2.6 billion, compared with some US$3.5 billion in 2024, confirming a continued net inflow notwithstanding wartime risks.

Describe domestic legislation governing investment agreements with the state or state-owned entities.

Investment agreements with the state or state-owned entities in Ukraine are governed by a comprehensive legal framework designed to regulate investment activities, protect investor rights, and promote economic development. This framework comprises several key legislative acts outlining the procedures, rights, obligations, and protections for both domestic and foreign investors engaging in agreements with the state or state-owned entities. Below is a detailed description of the primary laws and regulations governing such investment agreements in Ukraine.


Primary legislation governing foreign investment

• The Law of Ukraine 'On Investment Activity' (No. 1560-XII, 18 September 1991) establishes the basic conditions and principles for investment activities in Ukraine and provides the legal basis for investment agreements; offers additional safeguards, including compensation for losses due to unlawful actions by state bodies and protection in the event of changes in legislation that negatively affect investors.
• The Law of Ukraine "On the Regime of Foreign Investment" (No. 93/96-ВР, 19 March 1996) outlines the legal regime for foreign investments, including types of investments, implementation forms, and regulations for enterprises with foreign investment. This law establishes the general principles governing foreign investments, ensuring equal treatment of foreign and domestic investors. It guarantees protection against discrimination and unlawful expropriation and provides rights to repatriate profits.
   

The "Investment Nannies" law

The Law of Ukraine "On State Support for Investment Projects with Significant Investments in Ukraine" (Law No. 1116-IX) (also known as the law "On Investment Nannies"): Enacted in 2020, this law aims to attract significant investments by providing state support to large investors. The law applies to investment projects with significant investments that meet specific criteria and are implemented in priority sectors of the economy. The Law 'On State Support for Investment Projects with Significant Investments in Ukraine' offers incentives such as tax benefits, customs duty exemptions, land-related support, infrastructure support and assigns an "investment nanny" (special manager) to facilitate interactions between the investor and state authorities. An eligible investor must enter into a direct investment agreement with the government of Ukraine, represented by the Cabinet of Ministers. The law provides that investors are protected from adverse changes in legislation regarding tax rates, customs duties and other regulatory measures related to the investment project for the duration of the investment agreement. Investors have the right to refer disputes to international arbitration institutions as agreed in the investment agreement. Investors are granted access to Ukrainian courts and legal protections under domestic law.

The Ukrainian parliament is currently considering Draft Law No. 13352, registered on 9 June 2025, that would amend the Law of Ukraine "On State Support for Investment Projects with Significant Investments in Ukraine" by extending the list of sectors in which a qualifying investment project may be implemented. The additional sectors are the defence industry, livestock farming, power generation, and the leasing and operation of buildings, premises and structures for the storage and warehousing of goods and others. The Committee on Economic Development recommended adoption at first reading on 6 November 2025, and the bill was placed on the session agenda in February 2026, but it has not yet been voted on.

 

Public-private partnership legislation

The Law of Ukraine "On Public-Private Partnership" establishes the organisational and legal framework for cooperation between public and private partners. Under the rules currently in force, a private partner must be a Ukrainian-resident legal entity specially established exclusively for the implementation of the relevant PPP project. The Law provides detailed regulation of the procedure for conducting competitive selection of a private partner, the legal status and guarantees of the rights of all participants in a public-private partnership (PPP), as well as the legal regime of PPP assets.

Public-private partnerships are used in various sectors, including the following:

• energy (production, transportation, distribution, supply, storage and accumulation of heat, natural gas, and electricity);
• transport and infrastructure (railway, maritime, river, road, pipeline, aviation, airports and runways, urban electric transport, metro and postal services);
• water management;
• health and social services;
• tourism, culture, and sports (including management and operation of cultural heritage sites);
• functioning and operation of land reclamation systems;
• waste management;
• production, distribution, supply, storage and accumulation of electrical energy;
• provision of social services, management of social institutions and establishments;
• provision of postal services;
• production and implementation of energy-saving technologies;
• housing and social infrastructure (including modular and temporary housing and facilities providing socially important services);
• ensuring the functioning of penal institutions, detention centres, border crossing points, security and defence;
• education and science; and
• electronic communications, digital infrastructure, information technology, and cybersecurity.

Key provisions of the PPP Law include the following:

• forms of public-private partnership: concession agreement and PPP agreement. The PPP law does not regulate production-sharing agreements;
• selection procedure: establishes transparent competitive procedures for selecting private partners;
• risk allocation: defines the distribution of risks between the public and private partners;
• ownership: the transfer of an existing PPP object to a private partner does not result in the transfer of ownership. PPP objects may not be privatised or otherwise alienated during the preparation of the PPP project and the term of the PPP agreement, subject to the exceptions provided by law. Certain assets created or acquired by the private partner may be privately owned in accordance with the law; and
• government support: allows for state support measures, such as guarantees, co-financing, and other incentives.

Law of Ukraine "On Concession"

The Law of Ukraine "On Concession" (No. 155-IX, 3 October 2019) specifically governs concession agreements.

Under the Law, a concession is a form of PPP under which the concessionaire finances, in whole or in part, the creation, construction and/or maintenance of the concession object and receives the right to manage and/or operate that object and provide socially significant services, with the predominant part of the operational risk transferred to the concessionaire. This law outlines procedures for selecting concession operators and provides fair treatment and stabilisation guarantees.

Key provisions include the following:

• concession objects: state or municipal property, certain assets of public-sector companies, as well as assets created or constructed by the concessionaire in the course of the concession project;
• selection procedure: concessionaires are generally selected through competitive procedures, including restricted procedures, open procedures and competitive dialogue, subject to limited statutory exceptions permitting direct negotiations;
• contract terms: the Law specifies mandatory terms of concession agreements, including the subject matter, concession object, performance indicators and allocation of risks between the parties; and
• dispute resolution: the concession agreement may provide for mediation, expert determination, domestic or international commercial or investment arbitration, including, subject to statutory requirements, arbitration seated outside Ukraine.

Production-sharing agreements legislation

The Law of Ukraine "On Production-Sharing Agreements" (PSA Law) (No. 1039-XIV, 14 September 1999) establishes the legal framework for the exploration, extraction, and production of mineral resources in Ukraine under production-sharing agreements between the state and investors. The law aims to attract both domestic and foreign investments into Ukraine's mineral resource sector by providing a clear and stable legal regime that defines the rights and obligations of the parties involved.

Key provisions include the following:

• PSAs are contractual arrangements under which the state entrusts an investor with the exploration and extraction of mineral resources at the investor's own expense and risk. The produced resources are subsequently divided between the state and the investor, with the investor receiving compensation production to recover eligible costs and a share of profit production. Investors are generally selected through a competition, although the law permits PSAs to be concluded without a competition in certain cases.
• Applicable sectors: mineral resources with a focus on the oil and gas industries.
• Parties to the agreement:

- state representation: the state is represented by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine or authorised bodies; and

- investors: can be Ukrainian or foreign legal entities, including joint ventures and consortia.

• Profit sharing and compensation:

- cost recovery: eligible costs incurred by the investor in performing the PSA are reimbursed through compensation production; and

- profit-production sharing: the PSA determines the respective shares of profit production allocated to the state and the investor.The formula is provided by the agreement and is typically based on predefined percentages or formulas that consider factors like production volume and market prices.

• Legal protections and guarantees:

- repatriation of funds: foreign investors may convert and transfer abroad funds received under the PSA;

- stabilisation guarantee: the state guarantees that the legislation in force at the time the PSA is concluded will apply to the investor's rights and obligations defined by the PSA throughout its term, subject to statutory exceptions. The guarantee does not apply to legislative changes concerning defence, national security, public order or environmental protection; and

- tax regime: taxation of activities carried out under a PSA is governed by the special rules of the Tax Code of Ukraine.

• Dispute resolution: disputes may be resolved through negotiations, Ukrainian courts or international arbitration, depending on the terms agreed upon in the PSA.
• Duration: the agreement's term can be up to 50 years.

The reform, expected to be introduced shortly, is intended to adapt the law to solid mineral projects.

Law "On Public Procurement"

The new Law of Ukraine "On Public Procurement" (No. 4888-IX) was adopted on 27 May 2026. It entered into force on 24 June 2026 and, subject to certain provisions that apply earlier, will become fully operational on 24 March 2027. The Law establishes the legal and economic framework for the procurement of goods, works and services, as well as project design contests, to meet the needs of the state and territorial communities. It is also aimed at further aligning Ukraine's public procurement legislation with the EU legal framework.

Key provisions include the following:

• procurement principles: efficiency, transparency, proportionality, non-discrimination, equal treatment, fair competition, objective selection of successful bidders and prevention of corruption;
• procurement procedures: competitive procedures include open tenders, restricted tenders, competitive dialogue, competitive procedures with negotiations and innovation partnerships;
• procurement mechanisms: the Law regulates, among other mechanisms, framework agreements, dynamic purchasing systems, joint procurement and reserved contracts;
• electronic procurement: procurement procedures are generally conducted through the electronic procurement system, subject to exceptions provided by law; and
• review and control: the Law provides mechanisms for challenging procurement decisions before the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine and for monitoring compliance with procurement legislation.

Privatisation legislation

The Law of Ukraine "On the Privatisation of State and Municipal Property" (Law No. 2269-VIII, 18 January 2018) provides the legal framework for the privatisation of state and municipal assets in Ukraine. The law applies to the following:

• state-owned property: assets owned by the State of Ukraine, including enterprises, shares and real estate;
• municipal property: assets owned by local self-government bodies; and
• privatisation objects: including single property complexes of state and municipal enterprises, shares, real estate and other assets eligible for privatisation.

Rights and protections for investors include the following:

• protection of rights: the state ensures the protection of purchasers' rights under privatisation agreements;
• non-discrimination: both domestic and foreign investors may participate in privatisation, subject to statutory restrictions; and
• currency transfers: foreign investors have the right to transfer funds abroad in accordance with Ukrainian currency regulations.

Key aspects of the privatisation process include the following:

• sale procedure: privatisation is generally carried out through electronic auctions or, in cases provided by law, through buyout;
• contract terms: sale and purchase agreements set out the applicable privatisation terms, including the purchase price, payment terms, asset transfer conditions and any post-privatisation obligations;
• regulatory approvals: where required by law, transactions may be subject to relevant regulatory approvals, including merger clearance; and
• transfer of ownership: ownership generally passes to the buyer after conclusion of the sale and purchase agreement and execution of the transfer and acceptance act; specific rules apply to shareholdings.

Identify and give brief details of the bilateral or multilateral investment treaties to which the state is a party, also indicating whether they are in force.
 

Bilateral investment treaties
 

As of August 2026, Ukraine is a party to the following effective bilateral investment treaties (BITs):

• Ukraine–Qatar BIT (2018) (entered into force on 9 April 2019);
• Japan–Ukraine BIT (2015) (entered into force on 26 November 2015);
• Kuwait–Ukraine BIT (2002) (entered into force on 11 June 2013);
• Israel–Ukraine BIT (2010) (entered into force on 20 November 2012);
• Oman–Ukraine BIT (2002) (entered into force on 12 May 2010);
• Slovakia–Ukraine BIT (2007) (entered into force on 20 August 2009);
• Morocco–Ukraine BIT (2001) (entered into force on 28 April 2009);
• Saudi Arabia–Ukraine BIT (2008) (entered into force on 18 February 2009);
• San Marino–Ukraine BIT (2006) (entered into force on 15 October 2008);
• Singapore–Ukraine BIT (2006) (entered into force on 14 July 2007);
• Panama–Ukraine BIT (2003) (entered into force on 13 June 2007);
• Jordan–Ukraine BIT (2005) (entered into force on 17 April 2007);
• Brunei Darussalam–Ukraine BIT (2004) (entered into force on 26 April 2006);
• Finland–Ukraine BIT (2004) (entered into force on 7 December 2005);
• Albania–Ukraine BIT (2002) (entered into force on 30 April 2004);
• Ukraine–United Arab Emirates BIT (2003) (entered into force on 9 April 2004);
• Bosnia and Herzegovina–Ukraine BIT (2002) (entered into force on 22 January 2004);
• Portugal–Ukraine BIT (2000) (entered into force on 18 July 2003);
• Iran, Islamic Republic of–Ukraine BIT (1996) (entered into force on 5 July 2003);
• Tajikistan–Ukraine BIT (2001) (entered into force on 27 May 2003);
• Libya–Ukraine BIT (2001) (entered into force on 23 April 2003);
• Syrian Arab Republic–Ukraine BIT (2002) (entered into force on 16 March 2003);
• Serbia–Ukraine BIT (2001) (entered into force on 14 August 2001);
• BLEU (Belgium-Luxembourg Economic Union)–Ukraine BIT (1996) (entered into force on 27 July 2001);
• Croatia–Ukraine BIT (1997) (entered into force on 5 June 2001);
• Slovenia–Ukraine BIT (1999) (entered into force on 1 June 2000);
• Lebanon–Ukraine BIT (1996) (entered into force on 26 May 2000);
• North Macedonia–Ukraine BIT (1998) (entered into force on 25 March 2000);
• Spain–Ukraine BIT (1998) (entered into force on 13 March 2000);
• Russian Federation–Ukraine BIT (1998) (entered into force on 27 January 2000). The BIT was terminated on 27 January 2025. By virtue of the BIT’s "sunset provision", Ukrainian and Russian investments made in the territory of the respective other country prior to 27 January 2025 remain protected under the BIT until 27 January 2035;
• Turkmenistan–Ukraine BIT (1998) (entered into force on 28 September 1999);
• Turkey–Ukraine BIT (1996) (entered into force on 21 May 1998);
• Latvia–Ukraine BIT (1997) (entered into force on 30 December 1997);
• Azerbaijan–Ukraine BIT (1997) (entered into force on 9 December 1997);
• Austria–Ukraine BIT (1996) (entered into force on 1 December 1997);
• Korea, Republic of–Ukraine BIT (1996) (entered into force on 3 November 1997);
• Chile–Ukraine BIT (1995) (entered into force on 29 August 1997);
• Indonesia–Ukraine BIT (1996) (entered into force on 22 June 1997);
• Belarus–Ukraine BIT (1995) (entered into force on 11 June 1997);
• Netherlands–Ukraine BIT (1994) (entered into force on 1 June 1997);
• Argentina–Ukraine BIT (1995) (entered into force on 6 May 1997);
• Sweden–Ukraine BIT (1995) (entered into force on 1 March 1997);
• Switzerland–Ukraine BIT (1995) (entered into force on 21 January 1997);
• Greece–Ukraine BIT (1994) (entered into force on 4 January 1997);
• Georgia–Ukraine BIT (1995) (entered into force on 18 December 1996);
• Cuba–Ukraine BIT (1995) (entered into force on 4 December 1996);
• Hungary–Ukraine BIT (1994) (entered into force on 3 December 1996);
• Ukraine–United States of America BIT (1994) (entered into force on 16 November 1996);
• Germany–Ukraine BIT (1993) (entered into force on 29 June 1996);
• Moldova, Republic of–Ukraine BIT (1995) (entered into force on 27 May 1996);
• Armenia–Ukraine BIT (1994) (entered into force on 7 March 1996);
• France–Ukraine BIT (1994) (entered into force on 26 January 1996);
• Bulgaria–Ukraine BIT (1994) (entered into force on 10 December 1995);
• Estonia–Ukraine BIT (1995) (entered into force on 4 November 1995);
• Czech Republic–Ukraine BIT (1994) (entered into force on 2 November 1995);
• Kazakhstan–Ukraine BIT (1994) (entered into force on 4 August 1995);
• Canada–Ukraine BIT (1994) (entered into force on 24 July 1995);
• Lithuania–Ukraine BIT (1994) (entered into force on 6 March 1995);
• Ukraine–Viet Nam BIT (1994) (entered into force on 8 December 1994);
• Ukraine–Uzbekistan BIT (1993) (entered into force on 26 May 1994);
• Denmark–Ukraine BIT (1992) (entered into force on 29 April 1994);
• Egypt–Ukraine BIT (1992) (entered into force on 13 October 1993);
• Poland–Ukraine BIT (1993) (entered into force on 14 September 1993);
• China–Ukraine BIT (1992) (entered into force on 29 May 1993);
• Ukraine–United Kingdom BIT (1993) (entered into force on 10 February 1993); and
• Mongolia–Ukraine BIT (1992) (entered into force on 5 November 1992);

In addition, Ukraine and the United States concluded the Agreement on the Establishment of the United States–Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund (2025), which entered into force for Ukraine on 23 May 2025 and establishes a joint investment framework for Ukraine's reconstruction. While not a classic BIT, it is an international investment agreement of strategic significance.
 

The following BITs were signed but have not become effective because one or both parties have not completed the relevant procedures:

• Turkey–Ukraine BIT (2017) (upon entering in force, this new BIT will substitute the previous Turkey–Ukraine BIT (1996));
• Equatorial Guinea–Ukraine BIT (2005);
• Gambia–Ukraine BIT (2001);
• Ukraine–Yemen BIT (2001);
• Congo, Democratic Republic of the–Ukraine BIT (2000);
• Romania–Ukraine BIT (1995); and
• Kyrgyzstan–Ukraine BIT (1993).

Also, Ukraine is a contracting party to an investment treaty with the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries Fund for International Development (2017) (entered into force on 27 June 2018). This agreement is designed to facilitate investment channelled by the fund in the Ukrainian economy and support small and medium-sized enterprises in various sectors including energy, infrastructure, agriculture and others.
 

On 22 September 2023, Ukraine entered into the updated Canada–Ukraine Free Trade Agreement (CUFTA), which entered into force on 1 July 2024. The agreement retains the market access provisions for goods from the Canada–Ukraine Free Trade Agreement (FTA) (2016) and has been updated to include sections on investment, services and inclusive trade. According to Letter No. 72/14-612/1-72491 of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine dated 28 May 2024, upon the entry into force of the updated Canada–Ukraine FTA, the Canada–Ukraine FTA (2016) shall terminate, while the Canada–Ukraine BIT (1994) shall be suspended, except for certain provisions.

 

Multilateral investment treaties
 

Ukraine is a contracting party to the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT).
 

Ukraine has also signed (but not ratified) the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) Treaty on cooperation in investment activity (1993).

 

If applicable, indicate whether the bilateral or multilateral investment treaties to which the state is a party extend to overseas territories.
 

The overwhelming majority of BITs to which Ukraine is a party focus on protections for investments made within the sovereign territory of the contracting parties, as outlined in their respective agreements. However, there are several BITs that contain special provisions on the extension of the agreement to overseas territories subject to certain conditions as follows:

• the Netherlands–Ukraine BIT (1994) applies to the European part of the Netherlands, as well as the Netherlands Antilles (dissolved in 2010, the treaty's application to its successor entities not being publicly clarified) and Aruba, unless the treaty ratification notification indicates otherwise. However, the relevant ratification notifications do not appear to be publicly accessible;
• the Denmark–Ukraine BIT (1992) states that it may be extended to the territories of the Faroe Islands and Greenland if the contracting parties agree separately. However, there is no publicly available information indicating that such an agreement was reached; and
• the Ukraine–United Kingdom BIT (1993) contains a provision allowing it to be extended to the territories for whose international relations the UK government is responsible, if agreed between the parties through an exchange of notes. Yet, there is no publicly available record of such an extension agreement.

Additional protocols to BITs and multilateral treaties that have been entered into alongside the main agreements are as follows:

• Protocol to the Energy Charter Treaty on Energy Efficiency and Related Environmental Aspects;
• Protocol to the Ukraine–United Arab Emirates BIT (2003);
• Protocol to the Brunei Darussalam–Ukraine BIT (2004);
• Protocol to the Iran–Ukraine BIT (1996);   
• Protocol to the Netherlands–Ukraine BIT (1994);
• Protocol to the Germany–Ukraine BIT (1993);
• Protocol to the Portugal–Ukraine BIT (2000);
• Protocol to the Chile–Ukraine BIT (1995);
• Protocol to the Switzerland–Ukraine BIT (1995); and
• Protocol to the Ukraine–United States of America BIT (1994).
   

New additional protocols and amendments
 

Ukraine has concluded the following additional protocols to certain BITs:

• Additional protocol to the Czech Republic–Ukraine BIT (1994) (has been ratified by Ukraine on 20 January 2010); and
• Additional protocol to the Croatia–Ukraine BIT (1997) (has been ratified by Ukraine on 4 October 2017).

Ukraine has also signed and ratified the Amendment to the Trade-related Provisions of the Energy Charter Treaty that entered into force on 21 January 2010.

 

New investment treaties
 

Ukraine has concluded the following new BITs and FTAs, replacing the previously effective agreements with these countries:

• the Updated Canada–Ukraine Free Trade Agreement (CUFTA) of 22 September 2023, partially replacing the Canada–Ukraine BIT (1994);
• the Ukraine–Turkey BIT of 9 October 2017, replacing the Turkey–Ukraine BIT (1996);
• the Ukraine–Israel BIT of 24 November 2010, replacing the Israel–Ukraine BIT (1994);
• the Ukraine–Slovakia BIT of 26 February 2007, replacing the Ukraine–Slovakia BIT (1994); and
• the Ukraine–Finland BIT of 7 October 2004, replacing the Ukraine–Finland BIT (1992).

Following the outbreak of the full-scale invasion by the Russian Federation of Ukraine on 24 February 2022, Ukraine initiated its exit from a number of bilateral treaties and agreements concluded with the Russian Federation. In particular, on 10 August 2023, Ukraine adopted the Law of Ukraine On Termination of the Agreement between the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine and the Government of the Russian Federation on the Promotion and Mutual Protection of Investments (No. 3329-IX). As a result, the BIT was terminated on 27 January 2025. According to the BIT’s "sunset provision", Ukrainian and Russian investments made in the territory of the respective other country prior to 27 January 2025 remain protected under the BIT until 27 January 2035.

Ukraine's membership in the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) has led to overlapping investment treaty commitments for the country. Ukraine is a party to the multilateral ECT, and it has signed numerous bilateral investment treaties (BITs) with individual countries, some of which are also signatories to the ECT. As a result, the ECT and Ukraine's BITs with ECT member states continue to operate in parallel, giving investors the flexibility to select the agreement they believe provides the most favourable terms when making claims against Ukraine.

Yes. Ukraine signed the ICSID Convention on 3 April 1998 and deposited its instrument of ratification on 7 June 2000; the Convention entered into force for Ukraine on 7 July 2000.

Is the state a party to the UN Convention on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration (Mauritius Convention)?

Ukraine is not a party to the Mauritius Convention. 

Ukraine does not have an investment treaty programme.

Does the state have a foreign investment promotion programme?
 

Ukraine relies on three sets of tools: tax and legal incentive regimes, promotion institutions and international financing.

 

Incentive regimes
 

Significant investments ("investment nannies")
 

Law No. 1116-IX "On State Support of Investment Projects with Significant Investments in Ukraine" came into force on 13 February 2021.
 

A project qualifies if it operates in one of the priority sectors listed in the Law (these include processing industry, transport, logistics, waste management, healthcare, education, tourism, culture and sport) is completed within five years, and involves more than €12 million of capital investment.
 

The investor signs a special investment agreement with the Cabinet of Ministers, which can run for up to 15 years. It gives exemption from corporate income tax and from customs duty and import VAT, land tax relief, priority access to state or municipal land and compensation for the cost of connecting to infrastructure.
 

The Law also protects the investor: a stabilisation clause fixes the rules in force when the agreement was signed, and the parties are free to choose the governing law and the dispute resolution method, including arbitration.

 

Sector-specific regimes
 

Diia City is a special legal and tax regime for the IT sector. Defence City, introduced by Law No. 4577-IX of 21 August 2025 and effective from 5 October 2025, exempts its residents from corporate income tax if profits are reinvested, and from land, property and environmental taxes. Industrial parks offer tax and customs benefits together with infrastructure support.

 

Promotion institutions
 

UkraineInvest, the government's investment promotion office, is the main contact point for foreign investors and handles applications under the significant investments regime. At the 2026 Ukraine Recovery Conference, it signed a memorandum to open its first partner office in the United States. Alongside it, the National Investment Council acts as an advisory body under the President, while Advantage Ukraine (advantageukraine.com), a government platform launched in 2022, presents investment opportunities across sectors. Regional investment agencies run their own promotion activities and local programmes.

 

Financing

Ukraine Facility
 

An EU instrument in force since March 2024, it provides €50 billion for 2024–2027, made up of €33 billion in loans and €17 billion in grants, with a further €8.3 billion added for 2026. Its investment component, the Ukraine Investment Framework, had committed €8.5 billion in guarantees and grants by mid-2026, which is expected to attract close to €26 billion in private investment.

Identify the domestic laws that apply to foreign investors and foreign investment, including any requirements of admission or registration of investments.

The main domestic laws that apply to foreign investors and foreign investment include the following:

• The Law of Ukraine "On the Regime of Foreign Investments" (No. 93/96-ВР, 19 March 1996);
• The Law of Ukraine "On the Protection of Foreign Investment in Ukraine" (No. 1540a-XII, 10 September 1991);
• The Law of Ukraine "On Investment Activity" (No. 1560-XII, 18 September 1991);
• The Law of Ukraine "On State Support for Investment Projects with Significant Investments in Ukraine" (No. 1116-IX, 17 December 2020);
• The Law of Ukraine "On Stimulating the Development of the Digital Economy in Ukraine" (No. 1667-IX, 15 July 2021), establishing the Diia City regime;
• The Law of Ukraine "On Amendments to the Tax Code of Ukraine and Other Laws of Ukraine Regarding Support for Enterprises of the Defence-Industrial Complex" (No. 4577-IX, 21 August 2025), establishing the Defence City regime;
• The Law of Ukraine "On Industrial Parks" (No. 5018-VI, 21 June 2012);
• The Law of Ukraine "On Public-Private Partnership" (No. 4510-IX, 19 June 2025, in force from 31 October 2025);
• The Law of Ukraine "On Concession" (No. 155-IX, 3 October 2019, as amended in 2025);
• The Law of Ukraine "On Production-Sharing Agreements" (No. 1039-XIV, 14 September 1999); and
• The Law of Ukraine "On the Privatisation of State and Municipal Property" (No. 2269-VIII, 18 January 2018).

A number of general acts also apply, including the Civil Code of Ukraine, the Tax Code of Ukraine and the Customs Code of Ukraine.
 

Several further acts shape how foreign investors enter the Ukrainian market:

• The Law of Ukraine "On Protection of Economic Competition" (No. 2210-III, 11 January 2001, as amended), under which acquisitions above the statutory thresholds require merger clearance from the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine;
• The Law of Ukraine "On Sanctions" (No. 1644-VII, 14 August 2014), which restricts investors connected to the aggressor state; and
• The Law of Ukraine "On Limited and Additional Liability Companies" (No. 2275-VIII, 6 February 2018) and the Law of Ukraine "On Joint Stock Companies" (No. 2465-IX, 27 July 2022).

Ukraine's bilateral investment treaties do not impose separate admission requirements, but most condition treaty protection on the investment having been made in accordance with Ukrainian law.
 

There is no requirement to register a foreign investment as such. Mandatory state registration of foreign investments was abolished by Law of Ukraine No. 1390-VIII of 31 May 2016 "On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine Concerning the Abolition of Mandatory State Registration of Foreign Investments".
 

Ukraine is in the process of introducing a foreign direct investment screening regime. As of August 2026, draft laws remain under parliamentary consideration. In the meantime, the Cabinet of Ministers established an Interdepartmental Commission on Screening of Foreign Direct Investments. The Commission operates on an advisory basis and assesses the impact of foreign direct investment on national security, in particular in defence, energy, critical infrastructure and the extraction of strategically important minerals.

Identify the state agency that regulates and promotes inbound foreign investment.

• UkraineInvest: Created in 2016 and reorganised into a state institution in 2018, UkraineInvest is the government's investment promotion office. It advises investors, facilitates contact with state bodies and helps resolve problems investors encounter. Under Cabinet Order No. 133-р of 17 February 2021 it is the authorised institution supporting applicants and investors under the significant investments regime.
• Ministry of Economy, Environment and Agriculture of Ukraine: Forms state investment policy, including on significant investments, industrial parks and public-private partnerships.
• The National Investment Council: An advisory body to the President of Ukraine on improving the investment climate and coordinating between investors and state bodies.
• State Organisation "Agency for Support of Public-Private Partnership": Prepares and supports investment projects, in particular under public-private partnerships.
• State Property Fund of Ukraine: Manages privatisation and state property transactions.
• Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine: Grants merger clearance for acquisitions above the statutory thresholds.
• National Bank of Ukraine: Issues regulations on currency control and capital movement, including repatriation of profits.
• Ministry of Digital Transformation: Grants and administers Diia City resident status.
• Ministry of Defence of Ukraine: Grants Defence City resident status.
• Interdepartmental Commission on Screening of Foreign Direct Investments: Established by Cabinet Resolution No. 97 of 28 January 2026, it assesses the national security impact of foreign investment in sensitive sectors on an advisory basis.

Identify the state agency that must be served with process in a dispute with a foreign investor.

Does the state have a model BIT?

Does the state have a central repository of treaty preparatory materials? Are such materials publicly available?
 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs maintains a State Departmental Archive that houses official documents, including original international treaties and related preparatory materials.
 

Such materials are not publicly available.

What is the typical scope of coverage of investment treaties?

Investment treaties typically define "investment" and "investor" broadly, covering various assets and entities, including tangible and intangible property, shares, monetary claims and intellectual property rights. They apply to investments made by one party's investors in the other's territory, often including those made before and after the treaty's enactment.
 

The definition of an "investor" typically encompasses citizens or nationals of a contracting party, generally excluding permanent residents. This, however, is subject to a few exceptions. Four BITs (those with Azerbaijan, Canada, Israel, and Kazakhstan) as well as the Energy Charter Treaty, extend protection to both citizens or nationals and permanent residents of the contracting parties. Additionally, BITs with Bosnia and Herzegovina and San Marino offer protection to both citizens and permanent residents of these countries. However, Ukraine only extends protection to citizens, not permanent residents, of these nations.
 

Several BITs, and a Free Trade Agreement with Canada, contain provisions that aim to prevent 'treaty shopping' and ensure that only genuine investors from the contracting states benefit from the treaty's protections. Such provisions allow Ukraine to deny benefits to a company either controlled by a national of any third state or which has no substantial business activities in the territory of the other party.
 

Treaty protections include fair and equitable treatment, full protection and security, national treatment, and most-favoured-nation treatment. They safeguard against expropriation and provide compensation for losses due to extraordinary circumstances.
 

BITs also offer dispute resolution mechanisms, including investor-state and state-to-state procedures, allowing direct recourse to international arbitration. They typically have set durations with renewal provisions and 'survival clauses' extending protections after termination.
 

Modern BITs often address performance requirements, subrogation rights, and transparency in investment-related regulations. While generally consistent, specific provisions vary between Ukraine's individual treaties.

What substantive protections are typically available?

Investment treaties typically offer the following protections to investors:

• Fair and equitable treatment.
• Most-favoured-nation treatment (investors receive treatment no less favourable than that given to investors from any third state).
• Protection against expropriation.
• Compensation for losses (covers losses due to war, armed conflict, national emergency, revolt, insurrection, or riot; specific compensation for property requisitioned or destroyed by host state forces).
• Free transfer of funds (covers profits, capital gains, dividends, royalties, interest, liquidation proceeds, loan repayments, licence and technical fees, and investor earnings).
• Subrogation rights (a contracting party's right to assume investors' rights if it pays under an indemnity, guarantee, or insurance contract).
• Preservation of more favourable treatment (investors can benefit from more favourable treatment provided by domestic legislation or other international obligations).

Only six of Ukraine’s BITs (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Croatia, Russia, Tajikistan and Turkey) do not contain a fair and equitable treatment standard.

By contrast, other BITs are more detailed. The France–Ukraine BIT stipulates that limits imposed on the purchase or transportation for production of raw materials or supporting materials, fuel and energy shall be considered a breach of fair and equitable treatment.

All Ukrainian BITs provide that the provision of most favoured nation or national treatment does not extend to the benefits of membership of a customs union, monetary union or free trade area.

Most carve-outs in BITs relate to taxation and the application of other international treaties.

A total of 27 investment treaties contain an "umbrella clause", including treaties made with the following countries:

• Austria
• Azerbaijan
• Belgium and Luxembourg
• Denmark
• Egypt
• Finland
• Germany
• Japan
• Korea
• The Netherlands
• Panama
• Singapore
• Spain
• Switzerland
• The United Kingdom
• The United States

What obligations, if any, do investors have under existing BITs, and what is the impact of such obligations on investor protections?
 

Ukraine's BITs primarily emphasise investor rights and host state obligations, with limited explicit investor obligations. However, these treaties typically require investments to comply with Ukraine's domestic laws at the time of investment. Non-compliance may diminish an investor's ability to claim treaty protections in potential disputes.
 

Recent developments in Ukraine's international economic agreements have extended limitations on investors' rights to claim and, by extension, implicit duties. An example is the Ukraine–Canada Free Trade Agreement (Canada–Ukraine FTA). Chapter 17 includes standard investment protection provisions, barring investors from submitting claims if their investments were made through fraudulent misrepresentation, concealment, corruption or conduct amounting to an abuse of process. Canada–Ukraine FTA also encourages investors to incorporate internationally recognised standards of responsible business conduct into their practices.

 

What rights, if any, does the state have to bring counterclaims under existing BITs?
 

Ukraine's BITs do not give the state an express right to bring counterclaims. Whether a counterclaim can be heard depends on the wording of the dispute resolution clause and on the applicable arbitration rules. The latter allow counterclaims in principle: article 46 of the ICSID Convention with Rule 48 of the 2022 Arbitration Rules, and article 21(3) of the UNCITRAL Rules.
 

In Inmaris Perestroika v Ukraine (ICSID Case No. ARB/08/8, Germany-Ukraine BIT), German investors lost contracts whereby they operated Ukraine's state-owned sail training ship Khersones; a governmental order barring the ship from leaving Ukrainian waters cancelled the sailing season and was held to breach the BIT. Ukraine counterclaimed for the winter costs it had paid while the contracts were in force. The tribunal upheld jurisdiction, holding that the counterclaim was a dispute with regard to the claimants' investments and a component of the larger dispute the claimants had submitted to arbitration. The counterclaim was dismissed on the merits, because the tribunal had already found that the state-owned institute was contractually responsible for the winter costs.
 

In AMTO v Ukraine (SCC Arbitration No. 080/2005), brought under the Energy Charter Treaty, Ukraine sought its costs and €25,000 for reputational harm. The tribunal dismissed the counterclaim because article 26(6) ECT limits the applicable law to the Treaty and the applicable rules and principles of international law, and Ukraine had identified no basis in that law for a reputational claim.

What are the most commonly used dispute resolution options for investment disputes between foreign investors and your state?

The following are the most commonly used dispute resolution options:

• International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).
• ICSID Additional Facility (often mentioned as an alternative when one of the parties is not a member of the ICSID Convention).
• Ad hoc arbitration under the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Rules.
• The Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC Arbitration Institute).
• The International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce.

Does the state have an established practice of requiring confidentiality in investment arbitration?

Arbitration awards in most investment disputes are public, save for the following cases:

• Remington v Ukraine; and
• JKX Oil & Gas and Poltava v Ukraine.

Hence, Ukraine does not have an established practice of requiring confidentiality in investment arbitration.

Does the state have an investment insurance agency or programme?

Ukraine has established a comprehensive investment insurance programme primarily managed by the Export Credit Agency (ECA). This initiative is based on the Law of Ukraine No. 1792-VIII, "On financial mechanisms to stimulate export activity", adopted on 20 December 2016.
 

The ECA provides insurance, reinsurance, and guarantees for contracts that promote export development, operating on a voluntary and commercial basis.
 

As of 1 January 2024, under Law No. 3497-IX, the ECA's mandate has been expanded to include insurance against military and political risks for investments in Ukraine.

The war risks insurable by the ECA encompass the following:

• military conflicts, including war, armed aggression, and hostilities;
• violent changes in constitutional order or seizure of state power;
• terrorist acts and sabotage related to military conflicts; and
• occupation and annexation

The ECA accepts applications for investment insurance and has signed a growing number of war risk insurance contracts, including for investment loans.

This programme represents progress in Ukraine's efforts to mitigate risks for foreign investors.

How many known investment treaty arbitrations has the state been involved in?

Do the investment arbitrations involving the state usually concern specific industries or investment sectors?

Based on the analysis of known treaty-based investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) cases, the following industries emerge as prominent in disputes. The overview below covers both cases brought against Ukraine and cases brought by Ukrainian investors against the Russian Federation in relation to assets in Crimea and other occupied territories; where an investment spans several sectors (eg, VEB v Ukraine), the case is counted in each relevant category:

1. Energy sector (10 cases):

• Oil and gas (nine cases):

- Ukrnafta v Russia (2015): expropriation of oil assets in Crimea;

- Stabil v Russia (2015): expropriation of oil assets in Crimea;

- JKX Oil & Gas and Poltava v Ukraine (2015): disputes over royalty rates and gas sales regulations;

- Littop and others v Ukraine (2015): alleged interference with operations in the oil and gas sector;

- Naftogaz v Russia (2016): expropriation of oil and gas assets in Crimea;

- VEB v Ukraine (2019): expropriation of shares in a Ukrainian subsidiary involved in various sectors, including energy;

- Misen Energy v Ukraine (2021): dispute over a joint activity agreement for gas production;

- Enwell Energy v Ukraine (2025): dispute concerning the claimant's investments in oil and gas exploration and production in Ukraine; and

- Smart Energy & Ukrgazvydobutok v Ukraine (2025): dispute relating to investments in the Ukrainian oil and gas sector.

• ​Renewable energy (one case):

- Modus Energy v Ukraine (2021): Reduction of feed-in tariffs for solar power.

2. Banking and finance (seven cases):

• PrivatBank v Russia (2015): expropriation of banking assets in Crimea;
• City-State v Ukraine (2014): alleged failure to exercise regulatory oversight over the claimant's deposits;
• Oschadbank v Russia (2016): expropriation of bank branches and other banking assets in Crimea;
• VEB v Ukraine (2019): expropriation of shares in a Ukrainian bank;
• ABH Holdings v Ukraine (2023): claims arising out of the government's alleged unlawful expropriation of the claimant's bank;
• E.M.I.S. Finance v Ukraine (2025): dispute concerning an investment in Ukraine's financial sector; and
• Spectrum UA Credit v Ukraine (2026): dispute concerning an investment in the Ukrainian financial and credit sector.

3. Manufacturing (six cases):

• Wang and others v Ukraine (2020): measures preventing the acquisition of shares in an aerospace manufacturing company;
• Emergofin and Velbay v Ukraine (2016): expropriation of shares in an aluminium plant; 
• Boyko v Ukraine (2017): alleged takeover and seizure of a chocolate factory;
• Philip Morris and others v Ukraine (2021): imposition of a fine by the Antimonopoly Committee in alleged breach of due process;
• CTF Holdings v Ukraine (2024): claim concerning a beverage production enterprise; and
• AEROC Investment Deutschland v Ukraine (2025): dispute concerning investments in the production of construction materials.

4. Telecommunications and media (two cases):

• Lemire v Ukraine (I) (1998) and Lemire v Ukraine (II) (2006): disputes over radio broadcasting licences.

Other investment disputes have arisen in further sectors, including construction and real estate, transport and aviation (eg, Gilward Investments v Ukraine (2015), concerning the bankruptcy of an airline), trade and agribusiness (eg, Global Trading v Ukraine (2009), concerning contracts for the supply of poultry products, dismissed for lack of a qualifying investment), and gambling and entertainment, demonstrating that investment arbitrations involving Ukraine are not limited to the sectors identified above.

Ukraine has generally exercised its right to appoint its party-appointed arbitrator rather than relying on default appointment mechanisms. It has also appointed certain arbitrators on multiple occasions. Notably, Jürgen Voss and Brigitte Stern were repeatedly appointed by Ukraine in earlier cases, while more recent proceedings also show repeated appointments of Zachary Douglas.

Ukraine actively defends itself against investment claims brought by foreign investors. The process is primarily managed by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, which plays a central role in coordinating the state's defence strategy, which typically involves a combination of internal and external resources. Within the Ministry of Justice, a specialised unit responsible for representing the state in foreign and international judicial and arbitral proceedings coordinates the defence of investment claims. In significant cases, the Ministry engages external international law firms, selected through public procurement procedures, to act alongside its internal team.

Ukraine is a party to the following international agreements that oblige contracting states to recognise and enforce arbitral awards within their territory:

• 1958 UN Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (entered into force for Ukraine on 8 January 1961); and
• 1965 Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (entered into force for Ukraine on 7 July 2000).

As of August 2026, there have been nine adverse investment treaty awards against Ukraine in the following cases:

• Alpha Projektholding v Ukraine (2010);
• Lemire v Ukraine (II) (2011);
• Remington v Ukraine (2011);
• Inmaris Perestroika v Ukraine (2012);
• Tatneft v Ukraine (2014);
• JKX Oil & Gas and Poltava v Ukraine (2017);
• City-State v Ukraine (2018);
• Olympic Entertainment v Ukraine (2021); and
• Emergofin and Velbay v Ukraine (2026).

Based on available data, Ukraine has settled or complied with four out of nine adverse awards against it.

The state voluntarily complied with the arbitral award in Lemire v Ukraine (II) after the ad hoc International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Committee rejected an annulment application by Ukraine.

It did not oppose the investors’ applications for recognition and enforcement before the Ukrainian courts in such cases as Alpha Projektholding and Inmaris Perestroika Sailing Maritime Services.

By contrast, in Remington Worldwide Limited, Ukraine made a payment only after unsuccessful attempts to challenge the enforcement decisions before Ukrainian courts.

With regard to other four arbitral awards (Tatneft v Ukraine, JKX Oil & Gas and Poltava v Ukraine, City-State v Ukraine and Olympic Entertainment v Ukraine), while courts granted enforcement, there is no available information whether Ukraine actually paid the sums ordered. There have been no indications to date that the courts have granted enforcement in Emergofin v Ukraine.

If not, does the state appeal to its domestic courts or the courts where the arbitration was seated against unfavourable awards?

Ukraine has employed various legal strategies to challenge unfavourable awards:

Set-aside attempts

• Lemire v Ukraine (II): Ukraine attempted to annul the award through the ICSID. During annulment proceedings, it transferred damages to an escrow account as security. After the Ad Hoc Committee upheld the award, funds were transferred to the investor.
• Tatneft v Ukraine: Ukraine unsuccessfully attempted to set aside the award in the Paris Court of Appeal (rejected in November 2016). Consequently, Tatneft obtained favourable recognition decisions in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia, initiating enforcement actions.
• JKX Oil & Gas and Poltava v Ukraine: Ukraine's set-aside application was dismissed by the High Court of England and Wales in October 2017. Subsequently, Ukrainian courts partially recognised the award and granted enforcement permission.

Challenges to enforcement

According to the Unified State Register of Court Decisions, Ukraine challenged enforcement decisions in Ukrainian courts for:

• Remington Worldwide Limited;
• City-State v Ukraine; and
• Olympic Entertainment v Ukraine.

However, none of these challenges was successful.

Ukraine is a signatory to the New York Convention, incorporating its provisions, particularly article V, into domestic enforcement procedures. The Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine mirrors these grounds for refusing recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards.

As exemplified in the JKX Oil & Gas and Poltava v Ukraine case, the state may resist enforcement based on article 478 of the Civil Procedure Code, citing the following:

• violation of due process;
• lack of jurisdiction; and
• violation of public policy.

Courts may consider these arguments but still enforce awards partially, as seen in the JKX Oil & Gas case.

Additionally, the Law of Ukraine "On Private International Law" imposes state immunity restrictions. However, as demonstrated in Everest Estate LLC v Russian Federation, agreeing to arbitration in a bilateral investment treaty may be construed as a waiver of immunity.

In addition, the Law of Ukraine "On Guarantees of the State Concerning the Execution of Judicial Decisions" (No. 4901-VI, 5 June 2012) channels the enforcement of court decisions against the state and state entities through the State Treasury Service within the limits of budgetary appropriations. In practice, this procedure may result in queues and delays in payment rather than outright refusal. Wartime restrictions on enforcement proceedings introduced under martial law may further complicate enforcement against the state.

Are there any emerging trends or hot topics in your jurisdiction?

Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and 2022 invasion of Ukraine continued to shape the legal landscape in 2025 and 2026. Several hot topics and emerging trends are worthy of attention as follows:

• Disputes Related to Annexed and Occupied Territories: In disputes concerning the annexed or occupied territories, arbitral tribunals have developed a two-pronged approach, considering both legal steps (eg, annexation laws) and physical control to determine if these areas fall under Russia's "territory" for BIT purposes. Tribunals have frequently found Russia liable for actions committed on the annexed territories, particularly regarding unlawful expropriation (eg, Ukrnafta v Russia; Everest and others v Russia). This trend is likely to continue as the conflict persists and potentially expands to other regions. A number of Ukrainian individuals and entities have already expressed their intention to initiate investment arbitration proceedings against Russia in relation to its unlawful actions committed on the occupied territories. This includes Ukraine’s National Nuclear Energy Generating Company (Energoatom) that has put Russia on notice in a dispute concerning an expropriation of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. In its press release of 17 April 2026, Oschadbank announced that it has commenced a second arbitration against Russia under the Ukraine–Russia BIT, arising from the loss of substantial assets and economic activities in the Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions. Oschadbank had served Russia with a notice of dispute in July 2025, which went unanswered, and filed its Notice of Arbitration on 7 April 2026.
• Russia's approach to arbitrations: Initially absent from arbitrations concerning Crimea investments, Russia has shown a trend towards selective participation in more recent proceedings. In one investment arbitration (SCM Group v Russia) and other international disputes, Russia challenged virtually all arbitrators on the grounds of perceived bias, demanding that they be replaced by citizens of non-NATO-friendly countries. This tactic is likely to be employed in future disputes, as it has already yielded results (in SCM Group v Russia, two out of three arbitrators have been replaced).
• Challenges in award enforcement: Even when investors secure favourable awards against Russia, enforcement remains a significant challenge. State immunity issues complicate enforcement in third countries.
• Impact on third-country investors: The Russo–Ukrainian war is affecting not only Ukrainian investors but also those from third countries with assets in Ukraine. What AMIC Energy (Austria) first raised as a threat has since materialised: six treaty claims were registered against Ukraine in 2025 and 2026, most arising from Ukraine's own measures against Russian-linked assets. These include E.M.I.S. Finance (Netherlands–Ukraine BIT, nationalisation of Sense Bank), Enwell Energy (UK–Ukraine BIT, suspension of gas production licences because the ultimate beneficial owner was sanctioned) and AEROC Investment Deutschland (Germany–Ukraine BIT, court-ordered seizure of shares), together with Smart Energy & Ukrgazvydobutok, Optim Holding and Spectrum UA Credit. All remain pending at an early stage of the proceedings, and collectively they will test whether wartime sanctions and asset-seizure measures fall within legitimate regulatory conduct or amount to compensable expropriation.
• In April 2025, the Government of Ukraine and the United States entered into an Agreement on the establishment of the Reconstruction Fund. This development is expected to stimulate the allocation of subsoil use rights, especially with respect to deposits of strategically and critically important minerals.