Parliament updated the procedure for the enforcement of court decisions and digitised certain stages of enforcement proceedings
Ukraine’s Parliament has overhauled the mechanism for compulsory enforcement of court decisions: key stages of enforcement proceedings are being digitalised, restrictions on debtors’ property transactions are tightened, and new obligations are imposed on banks and payment institutions. The changes affect businesses, creditors, notaries, and financial institutions.
On 23 April 2026, the Holos Ukrainy newspaper published the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine Regarding the Improvement of the Procedure for the Enforcement of Court Decisions, Decisions of Other Authorities, and the Digitalisation of Certain Stages of Enforcement Proceedings” dated 7 April 2026 No. 4833-IX.
These changes aim to increase the efficiency of enforcement of court decisions and decisions of other authorities (officials) by digitalising certain stages of enforcement proceedings and clarifying procedures and time limits. For businesses, this means not only new opportunities for recovery but also additional checks, new operational risks, and the need to review internal processes.
WHAT HAS CHANGED
1. New requirements for statements of claim and applications for a court order
Claimants and applicants in monetary recovery cases must indicate their account details with a bank or a non-bank payment service provider and attach a document confirming the existence of such an account. If there is no account, an individual or sole proprietor must expressly indicate this and specify the preferred method of receiving funds.
2. Enforcement proceedings are becoming more digital
The law expressly allows enforcement documents to be issued in electronic form. The Automated Enforcement Proceedings System (AEPS) must provide for document registration, recording of enforcement actions, parties’ access to case materials, an electronic archive, the party’s electronic account, and interaction between enforcement officers and state authorities, banks, financial institutions, non-bank payment service providers, and issuers of electronic money.
Documents in enforcement proceedings for persons who have an electronic account in the Unified Judicial Information and Telecommunication System (UJITS) or its separate subsystem (module) for document exchange are sent electronically.
3. Part of the process for lifting seizures after repayment of debt is being automated
When the amount to be recovered does not exceed 10 minimum wages, the AEPS automatically generates a notice of debt repayment. This notice serves as the basis for removing the debtor from the Unified Register of Debtors and lifting the seizure of funds, electronic money, and securities existing in electronic form. On the day the notice is generated, it is sent to the bank, other financial institution, non-bank payment service provider, issuer of electronic money, or depository institution, which must lift the seizure no later than the following day.
4. The role of the Unified Register of Debtors is strengthened
The law effectively makes the Unified Register of Debtors a central filter for transactions involving property. If property belongs to a person entered in the Unified Register of Debtors, notaries, state authorities, local self-government bodies, other public authorities, as well as investment firms, must refuse to carry out actions involving the disposal or encumbrance of such property unless the law expressly provides for an exception.
Separately, the law provides that a transaction involving a debtor’s property that results in the impossibility of satisfying the creditor’s claims may serve as grounds for declaring such transaction invalid.
5. Restrictions in the areas of notarial practice, real estate registration, and vehicle registration are strengthened
The law clarifies that entry of a person in the Unified Register of Debtors is grounds not only for refusing a notarial action related to the alienation of real estate, but also for refusing its transfer as security (mortgage), subject to expressly defined exceptions, including the sale of property in the course of foreclosure on pledged or mortgaged assets.
In addition, a similar approach is extended to other registration actions: for real estate, during the state registration of title and mortgages; and for vehicles, during their re-registration and deregistration. If territorial bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs detect that the vehicle owner is listed in the Unified Register of Debtors, they must refuse the relevant registration action and notify the enforcement officer thereof.
6. Until full integration of the registries is launched, the Unified Register of Debtors will be checked through the Ministry of Justice website
Until interaction between the Unified Register of Debtors and state electronic databases and registries is implemented, state authorities, local self-government bodies, notaries, and other entities exercising public functions must verify information on the property owner through the official website of the Ministry of Justice by searching the Register and generating an extract. This is of practical importance for asset transactions already during the transition period.
7. Banks and the payment market are given new obligations
Banks, other financial institutions, non-bank payment service providers, and issuers of electronic money must notify the enforcement officer of the opening or closing of an account or electronic wallet for a person entered in the Unified Register of Debtors. Such notice must be submitted on the day the relevant account is opened or closed.
Upon receipt of such notice, the enforcement officer must decide, no later than the next business day, whether to impose a seizure on the debtor’s funds or electronic money, unless the law provides for an exception.
At the same time, the scope of information that banks must disclose to enforcement officers is expanded: information on accounts, electronic wallets, cash balances, transactions, payment purposes, deposits, safe-deposit boxes, and, in certain cases, the amount outstanding under the client’s principal obligation secured by a pledge or mortgage, where the bank acts respectively as the pledgee or mortgagee.
8. The law separately regulates levying execution against electronic money, securities, and deposit funds
The law details the procedure for the seizure and write-off of electronic money, the seizure of securities in the depository accounting system, and the levying of execution against funds placed in deposit accounts.
This not only expands the range of assets available for enforcement but also makes the relevant mechanisms more certain for enforcement officers, banks, payment institutions, and depository institutions.
9. The law preserves certain additional safeguards for protected categories of debtors
The law preserves additional safeguards in respect of a debtor’s sole residence in small-value cases, prohibits the seizure of certain special-purpose accounts, including those related to compensation for property damaged or destroyed as a result of the war, and also simplifies the notarisation of certain medical documents for persons from the security and defence sector who suffered as a result of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation. Separately, for the period of martial law and for one year after its termination or cancellation, a special protection of the sole residence is introduced for certain protected categories of debtors, provided that a relevant application is submitted to the enforcement officer.
10. For creditors, high-quality preparation of documents at the outset becomes more important
If, in the application for compulsory enforcement, the creditor immediately indicates the debtor’s accounts, electronic wallets, securities accounts, or specific property, the enforcement officer must act immediately after opening the proceedings: impose a seizure or verify title to the specific property and levy execution against it.
The law also introduces a separate mechanism for resuming enforcement proceedings after the enforcement document has been returned to the creditor.
POINTS TO CONSIDER
First, templates for procedural documents in monetary recovery disputes should be updated to include account details, and a certificate or other document confirming the existence of the account should be obtained from the bank in advance.
Second, it is advisable to review the approach to preparing materials at the enforcement stage. The more information about the debtor’s accounts, electronic wallets, securities, and other property that is collected at the outset, the greater the chances of a prompt seizure and actual recovery.
Third, in legal relationships where further completion depends on notarial or registration actions, the status of the counterparty or asset owner in the Unified Register of Debtors should be taken into account. This is especially relevant for transactions involving real estate, vehicles, pledged assets, and other property, the disposal of which may be restricted if the person is entered in the Register.
Fourth, creditors should bear in mind that the law preserves exceptions and restrictions regarding levying execution against certain assets and accounts of the debtor. This should be considered when planning recovery, dealing with pledged assets, and assessing the prospects of actual enforcement.
ENTRY INTO FORCE
Law No. 4833-IX enters into force six months after the date of its publication. At the same time, certain provisions enter into force already on the day following their publication, including the new requirements for statements of claim and applications for a court order, certain changes regarding the electronic form of enforcement documents, electronic document flow, and certain rules aimed at enabling enforcement actions to be taken more promptly.
