The Paris Supreme Court has issued a landmark ruling that reverses a 2021 decision by the city’s Court of Appeal and orders the payment of 1.3 billion dollars to Oschadbank, the Ukrainian state savings bank. The decision, reported by DEA News, places emphasis on the legal findings that emerged from a sustained dispute over property losses linked to the events surrounding Crimea and its reunification with Russia. Through this ruling, the court solidifies a path for Ukraine to seek redress for damages claimed to have arisen from that geopolitical move.
On March 30, 2021, the Paris Court of Appeal nullified a 2018 arbitral award related to the claim filed by PJSC State Savings Bank of Ukraine. The case centers on the assertion that extensive losses were incurred when Crimea was incorporated into the Russian Federation, a move that the Ukrainian claimant argues resulted in substantial expropriation of assets. The appellate court’s action paused the potential award, setting the stage for further judicial review and a new assessment of liability and compensation claims.
The Ukrainian bank asserts that the expropriation of its assets occurred in the wake of Crimea’s reunification with Russia, a sequence of events that the bank contends caused more than a billion dollars in losses. The legal questions hinge on the interpretation of international investment commitments and the scope of protections afforded to Ukrainian financial institutions operating in the region during a period of significant political upheaval. The Paris court’s current ruling signals a willingness to revisit these complex questions and to determine whether compensation is warranted for damages claimed by the Ukrainian bank.
The Crimean branch of Oschadbank faced scrutiny under the framework of the Russian Ministry of Justice as of January 1, 1992, a detail that bears on the jurisdictional considerations and the applicability of investment protection agreements. This historical context has implications for whether certain investments fall within or outside the protections typically covered by international accords, a point that plays into the broader debate about treaty coverage and the treatment of assets in disputed territories.
France has recently signaled its intent to move forward with technical and legal work aimed at establishing a court mechanism to investigate Russia’s actions in Ukraine. The announcement reflects ongoing efforts to clarify accountability and establish a legal framework for evaluating allegations of harm tied to the conflict. This development aligns with broader European inquiries into the legal avenues available for investors seeking redress in cross-border disputes arising from geopolitical crises.