The Arbitral Tribunal issued a procedural resolution, which established that the RF may submit their comments on the amount of damages and as to whether Privatbank be recognized as an investors, who made investments under the Agreement between the Government of Ukraine and the Russian Federation on Encouragement and Mutual Protection of Investments. The Tribunal rejected other motions of the RF, stating separately that the RF would have the right to state its objections to jurisdiction in a separate proceeding before The Hague Court of Appeal.

By its procedural resolution, the Arbitral Tribunal established that further public hearing in this case will be held from 17 to 21 May 2021.

By letters dated 07 June 2019 and 16 July 2019, Privatbank recognized the right of the RF to participate in the proceeding to determine the amount of damages caused to Privatbank, but requested the Tribunal to reject other requests of the Russian Federation.

The RF expressed a desire to participate in the arbitration and requested the Tribunal:

1. to grant the RF the right to submit its comments and observations on the jurisdiction and admissibility of the case;
2. to alternatively suspend the case pending the award of The Hague Court of Appeal on the objections of the Russian Federation regarding the awards of the Arbitral Tribunal; and
3. if the jurisdiction of the Tribunal is confirmed, to grant the Russian Federation the right to submit its comments and observations on the case and the amount of possible damages.

The Tribunal issued a procedural resolution, stating that Finilon’s complaint are out of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction and Finilon will not take part in the further consideration of the case.

The Arbitral Tribunal unanimously delivered a partial award in favor of Privatbank. According to Privatbank’s notice (press release is available at link) the Arbitral Tribunal recognized the following:

1. the Tribunal has jurisdiction over all the Claimants’ claims against the RF;
2. the RF has violated its obligations under the Agreement between the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine and the Government of the Russian Federation on Encouragement and Mutual Protection of Investments by illegally expropriating the assets of Privatbank in Crimea;
3. Privatbank is entitled to compensation in full for such violations.

Privatbank and Finilon provided the Tribunal with additional documents requested by it.

Privatbank and Finilon sent their comments on the results of the public hearings.

The hearing on issues of jurisdiction and admissibility of the case, not considered in previous awards, and consideration of the merits took place in The Hague from 01 to 30 November 2017 with the participation of the representatives of Privatbank and Finilon. The RF did not send its representatives to the hearing.

Comments of Privatbank and Finilon were provided on 16 October 2017.

The report of the appointed expert on civil law of the RF was provided on 16 October 2017.

The Tribunal ordered the appointed expert on civil law of the RF to submit a report on certain issues.

Privatbank and Finilon submitted their comments on the issues raised by the Tribunal in the Procedural Resolution No. 3. The RF did not provide its comments within the time limits set by the Tribunal.

The Tribunal decided to hold a separate hearing regarding issues of jurisdiction and admissibility of the case, not considered in previous awards and on the merits by Procedural Resolution No. 3. The Tribunal decided to conduct proceedings on possible damages separately in case the claims of Privatbank and Finilon are satisfied.

The Arbitral Tribunal issued a unanimous interim award on certain aspects of the jurisdiction and admissibility of the case.

Privatbank and Finilon sent their comments on the results of public hearings.

Public hearings on the jurisdiction and admissibility of the case took place in Geneva from 12 to 14 July 2016 with the participation of representatives of Privatbank and Finilon. The Russian Federation did not send its representatives to the hearing.

The Tribunal rejected the request of the Government of Ukraine to participate in a public hearing on the jurisdiction and admissibility of the case.

The Tribunal accepted the application of the Government of Ukraine as a third party.

The Tribunal appointed external experts on the civil law of Ukraine and the RF, who submitted their reports to the Tribunal on issues determined by the arbitrators.

Privatbank and Finilon provided their comments on the questions posed by the Tribunal. The RF did not provide its comments within the time limit set by the Tribunal.

The Tribunal decided to hold separate hearings on the jurisdiction and admissibility of the case by Procedural Resolution No. 2 and communicated its questions for comments of the parties.

Privatbank and Finilon sent their application to the Tribunal. The Russian Government did not comment on any aspect of the case within the time limit set by the Tribunal.

Representatives of the Russian Government sent letters to the Tribunal, refusing to recognize the jurisdiction of the Tribunal over this case and to give its consent to arbitration.

All the appointments to the Arbitral Tribunal were made. It comprised of Sir Daniel Bethlehem, QC (appointed by Privatbank and Finilon), Vaclav Mikulka (appointed by the third party due to the Russian Federation's failure to appoint its own arbitrator) and the presiding arbitrator Professor Pierre Marie-Dupuy (elected by the arbitrators).

Representatives of the Russian Government sent letters to the Tribunal, refusing to recognize the jurisdiction of the Tribunal over this case and to give its consent to arbitration.

Joint Stock Company Commercial Bank PrivatBank (hereinafter referred to as Privatbank) and Finance Company Finilon, Limited Liability Company (hereinafter referred to as Finilon) initiated arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) against the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the RF) under the Agreement between the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine and the Government of the Russian Federation on Encouragement and Mutual Protection of Investments. In their application, Privatbank and Finilon complained about Russia's violation of the Agreement by taking measures that made it impossible to conduct banking activities in Crimea.