1. Legal Framework

A. International Awards - New York Convention + CPC:

Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine (CPC) - Section VIII, Chapter 3, Arts 459-475 as amended by Law No. 1496-VIII (2016) - New enforcement procedure.

Competent court: Kyiv Appellate Court (Апеляційний суд м. Києва) as court of first instance for recognition of foreign awards, irrespective of debtor location. This is unique - centralization to avoid local bias. Appeal to Supreme Court.

Grounds for refusal - Art V NYC + Art 36 Model Law - exhaustive:

• Invalid arbitration agreement
• Violation of due process / not properly notified
• Award beyond scope
• Tribunal composition violated
• Award not yet binding / set aside at seat
• Public policy (публічний порядок) - Art V(2)(b) - most litigated in Ukraine
• Non-arbitrability under Ukrainian law

Limitation: 3 years from date award became binding - Art 12 of Law on Enforcement, Art 463 CPC.

B. Domestic Awards:

Enforced via application to local general court (районний суд) for writ of execution (виконавчий лист). Court cannot review merits, only formal grounds under Art 56 Law on Arbitral Tribunals.

C. Wartime Specials (2022-Present):

• Resolution of Supreme Court Plenum 2022: Enforcement against Russian entities (beneficial owner) - public policy ground expanded.
• Law No. 2115-IX (2022) on enforcement moratorium - enforcement against state enterprises, critical infrastructure, defence companies suspended during martial law, but arbitral awards still recognizable - writ issued but enforcement stayed.
• Kyiv Appellate Court practice since 2022: Service via electronic means acceptable if postal service impossible due to war - important for due process ground.

2. Procedure Step-by-Step for Foreign Award (Most Common - ICC, LCIA, SCC, VIAC vs Ukrainian party)

Step 1: Prepare Application to Kyiv Appellate Court

Must include (Art 462 CPC):

• Original or notarized copy of award + arbitration agreement (Apostille if needed, but NYC Art IV allows certified copy)
• Translation into Ukrainian by certified translator
• Proof award became binding (e.g., certificate from institution)
• Power of Attorney
• Evidence of state fee - 0.5% of claim but not less than 1 and not more than 5 minimum wages (now ~ 0.2% due to cap reform 2023)

Step 2: Service
Court notifies debtor. If debtor in occupied territory / abroad, publication on court website = proper service under Art 460-1 CPC (2022 amendment).

Step 3: Hearing
Single hearing, max 2 months. No merits review - juge d'exequatur principle. Debtor can raise only Art V defences.

Step 4: Ruling - Exequatur
If granted, court issues ruling recognizing and granting leave to enforce. Then issues writ (виконавчий лист).

Step 5: Enforcement
Submit writ to Private or State Enforcement Officer (приватний виконавець). Enforcement under Law "On Enforcement Proceedings" No. 1404-VIII.

Since 2019 reform, you can directly seize accounts, shares, real estate via Automated System of Enforcement Proceedings.

3. The Most Litigated Ground - Public Policy - Detailed Case Law

Ukrainian courts historically used public policy as broad escape. Supreme Court since 2018 narrowed it to International Public Policy.

Landmark Cases:

1. Case No. 796/165/2018 - Supreme Court Grand Chamber, 28 Jan 2019 - Yukos Style - Narrowing Public Policy
Foreign award (SCC) against Ukrainian state-owned entity. Debtor argued award violates public policy because damages excessive, violates Budget Code. Grand Chamber held:

Public policy under Art V(2)(b) means fundamental principles of legal order, not mere violation of imperative norms or misapplication of Ukrainian substantive law. Mere wrong application of law is not public policy violation.

This aligned Ukraine with CJEU Eco Swiss (C-126/97). Cited in 90% subsequent decisions.

2. Case No. 824/138/19 - Kyiv Appellate Court 2019, upheld Supreme Court 2020 - JKX Oil & Gas vs Ukraine
Investment arbitration under Energy Charter Treaty. Tribunal awarded $11.8 mln against Ukraine for unlawful tax claims. Ukraine opposed on public policy - sovereignty, tax law. Court enforced. Held: State cannot invoke its own public law as public policy to avoid treaty obligations.

3. Cases No. 824/100/19, 824/176/19 - Avia-FED-Service vs Ukraine (2020-2021) - Enforcement of $3 mln LCIA awards against State Enterprise Antonov
Kyiv Appellate Court refused enforcement initially citing public policy - military enterprise. Supreme Court reversed: Commercial activity exception - Antonov acting as commercial entity, not sovereign. Enforcement allowed but stayed under martial law moratorium.

4. Case No. 824/55/19 - Ostchem Holding Ltd (Firtash Group) vs Odesa Port Plant - Supreme Court 14 May 2020
Arbitral award Stockholm SCC - $250 mln debt for gas supply. OPP argued public policy because plant is strategic state enterprise, privatization ban. Supreme Court refused enforcement? Actually initially refused, then Grand Chamber reversed in 2021 - enforced partially, holding that debt for gas supply is commercial, not privatization, so not public policy. However enforcement suspended due to sanctions regime.

This case established proportionality test: Even if strategic enterprise, commercial debts can be enforced.

5. Case No. 824/211/19 - Supreme Court 2021 - Dubious Arbitration Agreement
Award from ICAC at UCCI (Ukrainian international arbitration). Debtor claimed arbitration clause in contract was forged. Kyiv Appellate Court enforced. Supreme Court set aside: Applicant must prove valid arbitration agreement with original. Court appointed handwriting expert. Important for proof standard.

6. Case No. 910/12537/18 - Supreme Court 2022 - Russian Entity - Public Policy Expanded Due to War
Award in favor of Russian company (controlled by Russian state) against Ukrainian company. Enforcement refused citing Art V(2)(b) - enforcement would contradict public policy due to Law No. 1644-VII on sanctions and Presidential Decree on aggression. First case where war as public policy.

Affirmed in Case No. 824/138/21 - Lukoil vs Ukraine (2022) - Award in favor of Russian oil company refused.

7. Case No. 824/29/22 - Kyiv Appellate Court 2023 - Service During War
Respondent in Mariupol, could not be served by post. Court allowed service via email + publication on judiciary.gov.ua + courier to Lviv representative. Debtor argued due process violation under Art V(1)(b) NYC. Court rejected - extraordinary circumstances allow alternative service if bona fide attempt proven.

8. Case No. 760/17232/20-ц - Supreme Court 15 June 2023 - Domestic Arbitral Tribunal Award
Domestic treteysky sud award enforced via local court. Debtor argued tribunal exceeded jurisdiction because dispute non-arbitrable (real estate). Supreme Court held: Since 2017 reform, real estate disputes ARE arbitrable except state registration disputes. Award upheld.

9. Case No. 824/168/22 - 2024 - Climate / ESG as Public Policy?
Award under SCC for coal supply, debtor argued award violates Ukraine's international climate obligations (Paris Agreement) and thus public policy. Kyiv Appellate Court rejected - environmental policy not fundamental public policy under NYC.

4. Non-Arbitrability Under Ukrainian Law - Art 12 CPC

Cannot be arbitrated:

• Disputes about state registration of rights
• Disputes about establishment of legal facts
• Corporate disputes about creation/liquidation of legal entity (but shareholder disputes arbitrable since 2017)
• Disputes involving state secrets

Case No. 824/184/18 - Kernel vs Ukrainian Agrarian Company (2020): Dispute about share purchase agreement with corporate governance issues - held arbitrable.

5. Practical Issues 2024-2026

1. Kyiv Appellate Court is overloaded - average 4-6 months now vs 2 months statutory.
2. Enforcement against assets abroad: Ukrainian award can be enforced abroad via NYC; Ukrainian courts issue certificate.
3. Set-aside at seat: If award set aside at seat (e.g., London), Ukrainian court MUST refuse under Art V(1)(e) - no discretion (Supreme Court Case 824/64/19 following CJEU).
4. Interest and Costs: Ukrainian courts enforce interest as awarded, even if usurious under Ukrainian law, unless violates public policy (case 824/95/20 - 30% p.a. allowed).
5. Sanctions check: Enforcement officer must check debtor is not on sanctions list - if yes, need special license from Cabinet of Ministers.

6. Checklist for Enforcement in Ukraine Today

• Draft arbitration clause: Seat outside Ukraine (Paris, Stockholm, Vienna), Kyiv Appellate Court will enforce faster than domestic.
• Include express waiver of sovereign immunity if SOE.
• Keep proof of notification - DHL tracking critical for Art V(1)(b) defence.
• Translate everything.
• File within 3 years.
• Expect public policy defence - prepare rebuttal citing Grand Chamber 796/165/2018.