When the counterparty sits in Kyiv, Lviv or Odesa, a standard contract is not enough. A checklist of clauses that actually function under war and sanctions conditions.
Contracts with Ukrainian counterparties legally function in principle like any other international contract. Practice shows, however, that typical Swiss boilerplate from 2019 often no longer works under post-2022 conditions — in particular on payment routing, sanctions risk and escalation procedures.
Instead of agreeing on a single correspondent bank, we currently define an ordered substitution chain — primary bank EU, secondary bank in a third state, tertiary option with deferral and interest. Not elegant, but operative. If the primary bank fails (listing, sanction, geopolitical friction), payment processing automatically shifts to the next contractually agreed level.
Moscow and Kyiv as arbitration seats are since 2022 only suitable in special cases. We currently recommend Vienna (VIAC), Geneva, Stockholm (SCC) or the Singapore International Arbitration Centre — depending on sector and enforcement question. What matters is not only the seat but also the enforceability of the award in the jurisdictions where the counterparty holds assets.