Although Ukrainian law now allows for the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards which grant interest of an undetermined amount with no fixed maturity date or clear method of calculation, in practice, challenges may still arise during execution proceedings. A good example of this is the high-profile case Nibulon v Rise, which proves that obtaining enforcement of an arbitral award in Ukraine is only part of the battle.
Although the Ukrainian courts have released little jurisprudence with respect to the application of sanctions, this practice is gaining traction in response to Russian aggression in Crimea and the Donbas region. In a recent case, a sanctioned Russian entity sought recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award against a Ukrainian company, which the latter argued would contravene Ukrainian public policy.
Following a recent Supreme Court decision, the outlook for recovery following the enforcement of the Everest Estate arbitral award against Russian assets in Ukraine does not look particularly optimistic. However, the chances of recovery may increase if the Ukraine Cabinet of Ministers exercises its powers under the International Private Law to allow enforcement against assets indirectly owned or controlled by Russia – and the grounds for exercising such power continue to mount.