Ukrainian energy firm Naftogaz has recently obtained approval from a civil court in Paris. They have now launched a €5 billion compensation claim against the Russian state. By embracing this decision, Naftogaz is theoretically given the legal tools to enforce a 2023 arbitration court ruling in its favor. That ruling specifically deals with compensation related to Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014. This ruling marks a huge victory for Naftogaz. They are committed to ensuring justice is served on Russia for its illegal conduct that violates their infrastructure.
The arbitration ruling stemmed from a case filed with the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, where Naftogaz accused Moscow of seizing pipeline and offshore infrastructure in Crimea, territory that Kyiv and the European Union consider occupied. The French legal action is the latest attempt to enforce the 2022 arbitration award in jurisdictions where Russian assets can be found.
Roman Chumak, CEO of the Naftogaz Group, welcomed the court’s decision. He added that “following this order by the French court recognizing and granting leave to enforce the final award, Naftogaz can proceed with enforcement proceedings on French territory.” He doubled down on the company’s intention to explore all legal options to hold Russia accountable.
In a similar move, word just arrived from Paris. This comes on the heels of a court seated in Saint Petersburg increasing an award against Naftogaz to $1.3 billion. Written by Nick Dyer. This case, brought by Russia’s Gazprom, focuses on claims that Naftogaz restricted gas transit through Ukrainian territory. The substantial increase further highlights the ongoing tussle between the two independent public agencies. This is even more relevant considering that the transit arrangements between Naftogaz and Russia expired this year, halting Russian gas transit to the European Union through Ukraine.
Naftogaz continues to navigate these complex legal battles as it aims to protect its interests amid a precarious geopolitical landscape. The company considers both lawsuits as related. More broadly, they are one part of an overall strategy to make Russia pay for the damage it’s done through its actions in Crimea.
Leave a Reply