Recovering debts from Russian counterparties is legally possible for foreign and EU-based creditors, but it requires a clear understanding of the domestic enforcement framework, the current sanctions landscape, and the limited cross-border routes that remain available. Russian Arbitrazh courts have developed expanded jurisdiction over sanctions-related disputes under Articles 248.1 and 248.2 of the Arbitrazh Procedural Code (APC RF), which affects where and how claims can be brought. Ferraz & Whitmore advises creditors on structuring and pursuing recovery strategies that are both legally sound and compliant with applicable EU and international restrictions.
When You May Need This Service
Foreign creditors typically turn to specialist counsel when a Russian counterparty has stopped servicing invoices, repudiates a contract, or becomes unreachable following the imposition of sanctions. The breakdown may stem from payment blockages caused by correspondent banking restrictions, deliberate non-performance, or insolvency proceedings initiated in Russia. In each scenario, the strategic choices made in the first weeks – whether to pursue arbitration, domestic litigation, or a negotiated settlement – can significantly affect the prospects and timeline of recovery.
Clients also seek advice when an existing award or judgment needs to be enforced against Russian-held assets, or when they need to assess whether assets of a Russian debtor exist in third countries where enforcement remains procedurally accessible.
The Domestic Russian Framework
The primary forum for commercial debt recovery in Russia is the Arbitrazh court system – a network of specialised commercial courts with its own procedural code (APC RF) and appellate structure, culminating in the Supreme Court of Russia. For straightforward uncontested monetary claims, a creditor may apply for a payment order (sudebnyy prikaz), which can be obtained and become enforceable in a significantly shorter timeframe than ordinary proceedings.
For contested claims, standard first-instance proceedings before the relevant regional Arbitrazh court apply. Judgments are subject to appeal, cassation, and, in exceptional cases, supervisory review. Enforcement is carried out by the Federal Bailiff Service, which holds powers to locate and seize assets, freeze bank accounts, and impose restrictions on the debtor's property.
The Impact of Article 248.1 and 248.2 APC RF
Since 2020, and particularly following the escalation of international sanctions, Russian procedural law has been amended to grant Arbitrazh courts exclusive jurisdiction over disputes involving Russian parties who are subject to, or affected by, foreign restrictive measures (Article 248.1 APC RF). This means that even where the parties agreed to a foreign arbitration clause or a foreign court, a Russian counterparty may apply to an Arbitrazh court and obtain proceedings in Russia.
Under Article 248.2 APC RF, Russian courts may issue anti-suit injunctions prohibiting a party from initiating or continuing foreign proceedings. Non-compliance can result in a judicial penalty enforceable against Russian-held assets. Foreign creditors who hold arbitration clauses or foreign court agreements should therefore seek early advice on the risk that a Russian defendant will invoke these provisions before a claim is formally commenced abroad.
Cross-Border Dimensions and Asset Tracing
Where a Russian debtor holds assets outside Russia – in EU member states, the United Kingdom, or other jurisdictions – foreign creditors may have additional enforcement routes. The strategic value of these routes depends on asset location, the legal basis of the claim, and the existence of a recognisable judgment or award.
- European Payment Order (EPO): Under Regulation (EC) 1896/2006, creditors with uncontested cross-border monetary claims against debtors in EU member states (except Denmark) may apply for a European Payment Order using standard forms. Once issued and uncontested, it is enforceable across all participating EU states without the need for a separate exequatur procedure. This is particularly relevant where a Russian-linked entity has a subsidiary or branch in an EU state.
- European Account Preservation Order (EAPO): Regulation (EU) 655/2014 allows EU-domiciled creditors to apply on an ex parte basis for the freezing of a debtor's bank accounts in another EU member state (except Denmark). The regulation also provides an account information mechanism to help identify which banks hold the debtor's funds. This can be a critical interim measure to preserve assets while substantive proceedings are ongoing.
- Hague Judgments Convention 2019: This convention provides a multilateral framework for the recognition and enforcement of foreign civil and commercial judgments. It is currently in force for the EU (except Denmark), Ukraine, and Uruguay. For the United Kingdom, it applies from 1 July 2025, but only to proceedings commenced after that date; earlier UK–EU judgments continue to rely on the Hague Convention of 2005 (where there is an exclusive jurisdiction clause) or national exequatur rules. Albania and Montenegro joined from 1 March 2026; Andorra from 1 June 2026. Creditors should note that only judgments arising from proceedings instituted after the convention entered into force between both relevant states qualify for its simplified recognition pathway.
- National enforcement routes: In jurisdictions not covered by the instruments above, enforcement of a Russian or foreign judgment against Russian-owned assets will depend on bilateral treaty arrangements or national exequatur proceedings, which vary considerably in their requirements and timelines.
Asset tracing across multiple jurisdictions – particularly where ownership structures are layered through intermediary holding companies – requires coordinated investigation and often urgent interim relief. Our analytics guide provides further detail on the procedural steps involved; for the full process overview, see our dedicated resource at Recovering Money from a Russian Company: 2026 Guide.
If your Russian counterparty has become unresponsive or you are concerned that assets may be dissipated, early engagement with counsel is advisable. Please contact us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com or visit our contacts page to arrange an initial discussion.
Sanctions Compliance and the Scope of Legal Advice
EU sanctions currently restrict the provision of legal advisory services to the Russian government and to entities established in Russia, with limited exceptions – including where access to justice or the exercise of legal rights requires it. Ferraz & Whitmore provides advice exclusively to creditors and claimants seeking to recover sums owed to them by Russian counterparties. We do not represent sanctioned persons or entities, and we assess compliance at the outset of every new engagement.
Creditors engaged in trade with Russia or with Russia-linked supply chains should also consider whether the underlying transaction, and any related settlement or enforcement steps, could be affected by asset-freeze provisions or licensing requirements. Our sanctions practice provides integrated support on these questions. Further information is available on our Russia Sanctions & Trade page.
Typical Pitfalls in Russian Debt Recovery
- Delay in acting: Limitation periods under Russian law are strictly applied, and a debtor may use the interval to restructure or transfer assets. Early action preserves more options.
- Over-reliance on a foreign arbitration clause: Where the debtor is affected by sanctions, Article 248.1 APC RF may allow them to shift the dispute to Russian courts regardless of the contractual forum. This risk should be assessed before serving notice of arbitration.
- Underestimating insolvency risk: A Russian debtor under financial pressure may initiate bankruptcy proceedings, which triggers an automatic moratorium on individual enforcement and requires creditors to file proofs of claim in the insolvency procedure. Our Russia Bankruptcy & Restructuring practice advises on creditor rights in these situations.
- Ignoring the Government Commission process: Certain transactions involving Russian assets or the repatriation of funds require prior approval from the Russian Government Commission on the Control of Foreign Investment. Failure to account for this may delay or prevent the receipt of any recovered funds.
- Insufficient documentation: Russian courts apply formal evidentiary requirements. Contracts, invoices, delivery records, correspondence, and payment histories should be assembled and, where necessary, translated and apostilled before proceedings are commenced.
- Late payment interest: Recoverable late payment interest under Russian law accrues at a statutory rate, but the applicable figure depends on the terms of the contract and the relevant provisions of Russian civil law. These amounts can be material and should be calculated and claimed at the outset.
Self-Assessment: Is Your Claim Suitable for Recovery?
Before engaging counsel, creditors benefit from reviewing the following questions. Positive answers to most of these generally indicate a stronger position, though each situation requires individual assessment.
- Do you hold a signed contract or purchase order with clear payment terms?
- Is there documentary evidence that the goods were delivered or services rendered?
- Has a formal demand for payment been sent in writing and acknowledged (or gone unanswered)?
- Is the limitation period under the governing law still running?
- Do you have reason to believe the debtor holds assets – in Russia or abroad – that could satisfy the claim?
- Has a sanctions compliance review confirmed that the underlying transaction and recovery steps do not require a licence or raise other restrictions?
- Is the debtor entity distinct from any sanctioned person, or is there a basis for an access-to-justice exception?
How Ferraz & Whitmore Approaches These Cases
Our approach begins with a factual and legal assessment of the claim: the governing law, jurisdiction provisions, the strength of the documentary record, and the debtor's known financial position. We then advise on the most appropriate procedural route – whether that is a payment order application before an Arbitrazh court, initiating arbitration under an existing clause, pursuing enforcement of an existing judgment, or combining domestic and cross-border steps.
Where interim relief is required – whether an asset freeze under the EAPO framework, a domestic precautionary measure in Russia, or a similar order in a third country – we coordinate with local counsel to ensure applications are filed promptly and on a sound evidential basis. We also advise on the interaction between enforcement proceedings and any parallel insolvency or restructuring process affecting the debtor.
Throughout, we maintain strict compliance with EU sanctions rules, advising exclusively on behalf of creditors and ensuring that each step in the recovery process is properly scoped within applicable restrictions.
To discuss your situation and assess the options available, reach out to our team at info@ferrazwhitmore.com or through our contacts page. We typically respond to initial enquiries within one business day.
Disclaimer: This publication is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information herein should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional legal counsel tailored to your specific circumstances. Ferraz & Whitmore assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this material. For advice regarding your particular situation, please contact info@ferrazwhitmore.com.