Abstract
This article deals with the characteristics of using international investment arbitration as a mechanism for obtaining redress for damages caused during Russian aggression. Taking into account certain shortcomings of this legal remedy, the author highlights the State's role in leveling issues related to arbitration costs and protecting the rights of small and medium-sized enterprises. The article contains an analysis of the subrogation clause in the Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine on encouragement and mutual protection of investments of November 27, 1998, as well as an alleged procedure for its implementation. The existing practice of horizontal investment lawsuits is also disclosed as an alternative. The author cites the existing practice of interpreting the Agreement on the example of investment arbitrations in the so-called “Crimean cases,” demonstrating its relevance for subjects in the newly occupied territories. The article includes a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of international investment arbitration in the Ukrainian context and the author's recommendations on non-standard methods of obtaining compensation in the context of an international armed conflict.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
