On 28 July 2026, the ICAC Vice Presidents Inna Yemelianova and Volodymyr Nahnybida participated in a roundtable discussion “Recent Changes to Ukraine’s Arbitration Legislation: New Opportunities for Ukrainian Parties.”

The event was organized by the Committee on Alternative Dispute Resolution of the National Bar Association of Ukraine. The discussion was moderated by Olena Perepelynska, the Chair of the NBAU Committee. Also joining the discussion were Roman Babii, a Member of Parliament and the Chair of the Subcommittee on the Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights  and Alternative Dispute Resolution of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Legal Policy, and Olexander Droug, a member of the Council of the  NBAU Committee on Alternative Dispute Resolution.

The professional discussion focused on the provisions of the Law of Ukraine No. 4856-IX dated 28 April 2026, “On Amendments to Certain Laws of Ukraine Regarding the Expansion of the Jurisdiction of International Arbitration.” Participants discussed the background of the legislative amendments and their significance for strengthening Ukraine’s position as a place of  arbitration, discussed the new criteria for the international nature of a dispute introduced by the Law and the possibility of referring disputes between Ukrainian entities to international commercial arbitration, the specifics of drafting arbitration clauses, the prospects for the development of investment arbitration in Ukraine, and practical steps that businesses and legal advisors can take right now.

Inna Yemelianova focused on the implementation of the provisions of Article 1 of the UNCITRAL Model Law and on broadening the approach to determining the international character of a dispute. She emphasized that the new approach to determining the international character of a dispute significantly expands the opportunities for Ukrainian businesses to use international commercial arbitration. Whereas previously a dispute between two Ukrainian entities could be referred to international commercial arbitration only if one of them had the status of an enterprise with foreign investment, from now on the international character of a dispute may also be established based on other criteria provided for by the Law, in particular, the place of arbitration specified in the arbitration agreement, the place where a substantial part of the obligations is to be performed, or the place with which the subject matter of the dispute is most closely connected. According to Inna Yemelianova, the updated regulations will have direct practical significance for Ukrainian businesses. It is already advisable for companies and their legal advisors to review their existing contractual framework, assess existing arbitration clauses, and take the new criteria for internationality into account when entering into future contracts. Of particular importance is the fact that the provisions of the Law No. 4856-IX apply to arbitration agreements concluded prior to its entry into force, which opens up the possibility of reassessing previously concluded contracts in terms of the arbitrability of potential disputes.

Using examples of contracts in the fields of logistics, trade, and IT, Volodymyr Nahnybida demonstrated the practical significance of the new criteria for the “international character” of a dispute and showed which categories of disputes were eligible for consideration in international commercial arbitration under the newly adopted Law. A common feature of all three examples is that they involve relationships between two Ukrainian parties—under the previous version of the Law, such disputes were practically never subject to international arbitration, and this is the key innovation. In logistics, these are contracts between Ukrainian carriers, freight forwarders, and shippers where delivery, transshipment, or storage takes place abroad—that is, a significant portion of the obligations is performed in another country. In trade, this refers to relationships between a Ukrainian manufacturer and a Ukrainian trader regarding goods whose transactions take place abroad – particularly in foreign ports – where the subject matter of the dispute is most closely connected to another country. In the IT sector, this refers to situations where a large Ukrainian company subcontracts another Ukrainian company (or entrepreneur), and the work is performed for a foreign client or part of the services is provided or used abroad—that is, the subject matter of the contract is linked to more than one country. For such contracts, legal drafting techniques will be of decisive importance – the precision of the description of the subject matter, the place where services are provided or obligations are performed, and, above all, the wording of the arbitration clause.

Legislative changes regarding the development of investment arbitration in Ukraine were a separate topic of the discussion. Inna Yemelianova noted that the Law had created the necessary legal framework for Ukraine to establish its own institutional system for resolving investment disputes. These changes take on particular significance in the context of Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction. The large-scale attraction of private capital, the implementation of infrastructure projects, concessions, and public-private partnership projects will inevitably be accompanied by the emergence of investment disputes. Inna Yemelianova emphasized that today, countries compete with one another not only on the basis of tax conditions, market size, or labor costs. The quality of national institutions is becoming an equally important competitive advantage. International arbitration is one such institution, and therefore the adopted law should be viewed as part of a broader strategy to enhance Ukraine’s competitiveness in the global race for investment, international business, and human capital. Ukraine could become attractive to investors with small or medium-sized investments, for whom litigating at the ICSID or the ICC is too expensive. The ability to resolve such disputes in Ukraine may be a more cost-effective alternative for them. She noted that the Law opened up opportunities for Ukraine’s development as a seat of investment arbitration in a broader context. This means that Ukraine could potentially be chosen as the seat of arbitration in disputes administered not only by the ICAC but also by other international arbitration institutions, and that our country could, in the future, serve as the seat of arbitration in a dispute between a foreign investor and a foreign state. In addition, Inna Yemelianova emphasized that the introduction of a mechanism for resolving investment disputes in Ukraine should be viewed not merely as an expansion of the scope of international commercial arbitration. In fact, this marks a new stage in the development of the Ukrainian legal market. According to her, this will create demand for a new category of highly qualified professionals who will combine expertise in international commercial and investment arbitration, public international law, international investment treaties, and the practical implementation of investment projects.

“The development of an arbitration jurisdiction always means the development of the legal market. The broader the range of disputes that can be heard in the country, the more highly qualified legal work, professional expertise, and added value will remain in Ukraine rather than being transferred to other jurisdictions,” concluded Inna Yemelianova.

In assessing the prospects for investment disputes that may be resolved in Ukraine, Volodymyr Nahnybida outlined the profile of a potential user of investment arbitration. According to him, this profile is determined primarily by the nature of the business seeking to enter Ukraine, as well as by situations where access to evidence, witnesses, and documents is concentrated here. With this in mind, the greatest potential lies primarily in contract-based disputes, rather than in “classic” disputes arising from international investment treaties. At the same time, such disputes are distinct from commercial disputes, in the resolution of which the ICAC has 35 years of successful experience. This is precisely where one of the areas for further growth lies—developing the skills to administer disputes involving an expanded and multi-tiered group of participants, which is a defining feature of this category of cases.

In addition, the adjudication of such disputes will contribute to the development of relevant case law at the court level. As this case law evolves, Ukrainian courts will increasingly apply concepts specific to investment arbitration during judicial review, gradually integrating them into their own legal practice. At the same time, the speaker noted that an analysis of the Supreme Court’s practice already showed that courts were applying the ICSID approaches, particularly regarding the criteria for determining whether a particular organization could  be considered a state body or an entity whose activities were linked to the state—an approach formulated in ICSID Case No. ARB/97/7, as well as regarding the significance of state participation in the capital of legal entities and ownership of corporate shares, as analyzed in ICSID Case No. ARB/97/4. Thus, this new category of cases will develop the expertise not only of arbitrators and counsel but also of national courts that perform functions of assistance and supervision in relation to arbitration.

In response to a question about the ICAC’s readiness to exercise its new jurisdiction, Inna Yemelianova and Volodymyr Nahnybida noted that the ICAC had been successfully administering international commercial disputes for nearly 35 years, had built an impeccable reputation, had well-established procedures, a highly qualified secretariat, and an internationally recognized panel of arbitrators. At the same time, they emphasized that an arbitration institution’s readiness is determined not only by its history but also by its ability to adapt. This is precisely what the ICAC is doing today – preparing the regulatory, organizational, and digital framework for implementation, including its new jurisdiction. For example, work is underway at the ICAC to prepare a new version of the Rules, while the ICAC’s electronic platform project is being implemented in parallel; after developing the technical specifications, we have moved on to the design phase. This will enable modern electronic case management, remote interaction among participants in the proceedings, electronic document management, and other digital services that have already become standard for the world’s leading arbitration institutions.

The video is available at this link (in Ukrainian).