Determination of the Tribunal’s Jurisdiction Over the Claims Concerning Investments on the Crimean Territory Under the Russia-Ukraine BIT

One of the main goals of international investment law is to protect investors against political risks in the host State concerned. Among which is the change of sovereignty or effective control over the territory where the investment was made. The taking of property in Crimea following its accession to Russia in 2014 has led to the claims being brought by Crimean investors under the Russia-Ukraine BIT before the number of Arbitral Tribunals. The present thesis is devoted to the analysis of whether the Tribunals have jurisdiction to deal with the Crimean investment cases and, in particular, whether the Russia-Ukraine BIT is applicable to the territory of Crimea and covers the allegedly expropriated investments and investors. The paper is comprised of three chapters. In the first chapter the legal issues of Crimean accession and its impact on the Tribunals’ jurisdiction were addressed; an attempt to evaluate the legality of the taking of property under the Russian and international investment law was made. The second chapter is dedicated to the issues of territorial application of the Russia-Ukraine BIT, where the conclusion that the Crimean status constitutes an implicated issue and prevents Tribunals from exercising jurisdiction over Crimean investment claims was reached. Moreover, the possibility to apply the BIT to the territory under de-facto control of the host State was criticized. The third chapter deals with the application of the Russia-Ukraine BIT ratione personae and ratione materiae. In this regard, it was alleged that investments brought by Ukrainian investors on the Ukrainian territory could not be recognized as foreign under the Russia-Ukraine BIT. At the same time, investors were not deemed to be protected under the BIT. The key finding of the research is that the Tribunals lack jurisdiction to decide the Crimean investment claims on merits.