During April-June 2026, the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) registered 1 statement of claim for forfeiture of assets in favour of Ukraine, namely case No. 991/4643/26 against Azarov Mykola Yanovych, a former Prime Minister of Ukraine (2010-2014) from the Party of Regions, and his son, Azarov Oleksii Mykolaiovych.

Also, on 28 April 2026, the HACC granted in full 1 statement of claim for forfeiture of assets in favour of Ukraine against Tsariov Oleh Anatoliiovych (a former Ukrainian politician and Member of the Ukrainian Parliament of the IV-VII convocations from the Party of Regions, who after 2014 became a collaborator and one of the main pro-Russian mouthpieces), case No. 991/1705/26.

As a result, in the specified case, the HACC forfeited in favour of the state: 

	21 land plots with a total area of 79.5358 hectares
	buildings and structures with a total area of 3017.2 sq.m.
	other property, in particular: a 2008 STEMA trailer, and 100% share in the charter capital of GLOU RINO, LLC (identification code 43198486)

The specified decision of the HACC of 28 April 2026 was upheld by the resolution of the Appellate Chamber of the HACC of 4 June 2026.

In June 2026, the State Property Fund of Ukraine (SPFU) published a plan for preparing seven priority assets, inventories and commodities for privatisation and sale. The plan includes both state-owned assets slated for privatization and assets forfeited in favour of the state from sanctioned persons. The list includes: Odesa Portside Plant, JSC, Sumykhimprom, JSC, Demurinsky GZK, LLC, Motordetal-Konotop, LLC, Glukhovo Quartzites Quarry, LLC, Mykolaiv Alumina Refinery Company Limited, Investment Union "Lybid", LLC, bauxite, alumina, iron ore pellets, iron ore briquettes and potassium chloride. Preparation for the auctions began in May-June 2026. The main wave of bidding is scheduled for October-December 2026 through the Prozorro.Sales system.

During April-June 2026, the Supreme Court as a court of first instance registered 31 statements of claim seeking to challenge Decrees of the President of Ukraine imposing or amending personal sanctions.

During this period, the Supreme Court rendered decisions in 2 cases challenging sanctions and denied both claims, namely:

• in case No. 9901/363/21 upon the claim of the Representative Office of Fermak Insaat Taahhut Anonim Sirketi, and 
• in case No. 990/131/23 upon the claim of SIA ROYAL PAY EUROPE, a Latvian financial company specialising in e-commerce and payment services.

Also, on 31 March 2026, the Supreme Court granted the claim of Verhel Serhii Oleksandrovych (a former Crimean deputy) challenging the sanctions (case No. 990/396/25). The claim was granted because the defendant had failed to provide specific facts (evidence) substantiating the reasons and legal grounds for initiating and imposing sanctions and did not determine the validity period of the sanctions, which is a violation of the principle of legal certainty sensu largo.

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, acting as an appellate court, reviewed and upheld the decisions of the Supreme Court in 2 cases:

• No. 990/224/23, in which the plaintiff - Radionov Tymur Markovych (a Russian businessman) - was denied the claim to cancel the sanctions;
• No. 990/109/23, in which the plaintiff – Masliennikov Oleksii Oleksandrovych (a former Metropolitan Joseph of Romny and Buryn) - was denied the claim to cancel the sanctions.

Standards of judicial review in cases challenging sanctions 

Taking into account the ECtHR judgement of 16 October 2025 in the case "M.S.L., TOV v. Ukraine", the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, in its resolution of 28 April 2026 in case No. 990/224/23, refined its previous position and set out the standards of judicial review in sanctions cases, which should cover verification of the following aspects:

1. procedural aspect
   
   • whether the procedure for adopting a decision on the imposition of sanctions, established by the Constitution of Ukraine and the Law of Ukraine "On Sanctions", was followed;whether the relevant authorities had the power to adopt such a decision;
   • whether the NSDC’s decision was put into effect by the corresponding decree of the President of Ukraine;
2. factual basis
   • whether the decision on the imposition of sanctions is based on a sufficient factual basis;
   • whether there is evidence capable of supporting with a sufficient degree of persuasiveness the conclusion about the existence of circumstances constituting grounds for imposing sanctions in accordance with the Law of Ukraine "On Sanctions";
3. legal qualification 
   • whether the established factual circumstances fall under the grounds for imposing sanctions defined by the Law of Ukraine "On Sanctions";
   • whether substantive law was correctly applied;
4. proportionality
   • whether the applied sanctions are proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued;
   • whether a proper balance is maintained between the adverse consequences for the rights of the individual and the legitimate aim of applying sanctions, taking into account the powers of the NSDC and the President of Ukraine;
5. absence of arbitrariness
   • whether the decision on the imposition of sanctions is manifestly unreasonable, discriminatory or adopted for a purpose other than that established by law.
     
     

State registration of real estate associated with a sanctioned person 

In case No. 260/8508/24, the state registrar denied SOTRA HOLDING AG the registration of title on the basis of a court decision, since the ultimate beneficial owner (UBO) of the current owner of the real estate - Terminal Karpaty, LLC - is under Ukrainian sanctions.

In the resolution of 1 May 2026 in case No. 260/8508/24, the Supreme Court recognised the conclusions of the lower courts on the legality of such denial as premature, cancelled their decisions and remitted the case for a new trial. At the same time, the Supreme Court noted that the case in which a decision was made to recognise the title of SOTRA HOLDING AG, was initiated long before the imposition of sanctions on the UBO of the current owner of the real estate, and SOTRA HOLDING AG (its shareholders / UBOs) is not under sanctions.

Given this, the Supreme Court concluded that, when considering similar cases, the following matters shall be determined:

• whether such state registration may affect the national interests of Ukraine, taking into account the aim of applying sanctions in accordance with the Law of Ukraine "On Sanctions";
• the grounds and date of acquisition of ownership rights to the real estate object by the new owner;
• the proportionality of state interference in the right of the new owner to peaceful possession of property.

A different (formal) approach to resolving such disputes, according to the conclusions of the Supreme Court, will not ensure effective protection of the violated rights of the initiator of the judicial process.

During April–June 2026, the international sanctions coalition against Russia continued to increase pressure on several fronts. In particular:

The European Union 

• On 23 April 2026, the Council of the European Union adopted the 20th package of sanctions against Russia. The package covers 120 new listings of individuals and entities and introduces multi-tiered sectoral restrictions targeting the energy, banking sector, crypto-assets, the military-industrial complex and trade. The economic restrictions of the package, in particular, are implemented by Council Regulation (EU) No. 2026/506. Among other things, the ban on transactions was extended to 20 Russian banks and four financial institutions in third countries, 46 vessels of the "shadow fleet" were added to the sanctions list, and a sectoral ban was introduced on providers and platforms established in Russia and intended for the transfer and exchange of crypto assets. A further 58 entities associated with the Russian military-industrial complex were added to the list of entities subject to tightened export restrictions.
• On 9 June 2026, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen proposed the 21st package of sanctions. The proposed restrictions would target the energy and financial sectors, crypto assets, trade, the "shadow fleet" and other mechanisms for circumventing sanctions. It was also proposed to ban entry into the EU for persons who served in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation after the start of the full-scale invasion.
• On 25 June 2026, the EU Council extended the sectoral economic sanctions against the Russian Federation for another 12 months - until 31 July 2027.

The United Kingdom 

• On 11 May 2026, the United Kingdom made 85 new sanctions designations. Of these, 29 concerned individuals and organisations involved in the forced displacement, re-education and militarisation of Ukrainian children, while the remaining 56 targeted individuals and organisations involved in Russian information operations and the spread of propaganda.
• On 16 June 2026, the United Kingdom announced 70 new sanctions designations and measures aimed at the Russian "shadow fleet", supply chains for the military-industrial complex and financial networks used to circumvent international restrictions. In particular, sanctions were applied to more than 20 oil tankers, vessels associated with the Arctic LNG 2 project, as well as insurance companies and other maritime service providers.

Canada 

• On 8 May 2026, Canada imposed sanctions on 23 individuals and 5 entities involved in the unlawful deportation or forced displacement, indoctrination and militarisation of Ukrainian children in the Russian Federation and in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine.
• On 12 June 2026, Canada introduced a new package of sanctions against 7 individuals, 34 legal entities and 121 vessels of the Russian "shadow fleet". The restrictions are directed, in particular, against representatives of the Russian military-industrial and nuclear sectors, manufacturers of drones and aviation equipment, financial networks and crypto-assets channels that help Russia finance the war and circumvent sanctions.

The United States 

• On 4 June 2026, the US House of Representatives, by a vote of 226 to 195, passed Bill H.R. 2913 - Ukraine Support Act. The bill provides for further security support for Ukraine and the imposition of additional sanctions if the Russian Federation continues the war or refuses to engage in good-faith peace negotiations. Potential restrictions cover Russian financial institutions and the energy sector, the "shadow fleet", individuals involved in the construction and maintenance of the Kerch Strait Bridge, assisting North Korea’s participation in the war and kidnapping Ukrainian children. The bill also provides for tightened export controls and the possibility of imposing higher tariffs on Russian goods.