Category: Ukraine

  • Ilyashev & Partners Secures Introduction of Provisional Anti-Dumping Duty on Imports of Steel Fasteners to Ukraine from China

    The International Trade Practice team of Ilyashev & Partners has secured the introduction of provisional anti-dumping duties on imports to Ukraine of steel fasteners originating in the People’s Republic of China.

    Last December, Ilyashev & Partners helped Druzhkovka Hardware Plant PrJSC initiate an anti-dumping investigation into imports of steel fasteners from the People’s Republic of China to Ukraine (as reported by CEE Legal Matters on January 31, 2020).

    According to Ilyashev & Partners, “on May 22, 2020, [Ukraine’s] Interdepartmental Commission on International Trade awarded to impose a provisional anti-dumping duty of 19.75% on the following goods: ferrous metal products, threaded, namely: screws, bolts and nuts classified under UKTZED codes 7318 15 69 90, 7318 15 81 90, 7318 15 89 90, 7318 15 90 90, 7318 16 91 90, 7318 16 99 90 and originating in the People’s Republic of China.”

    “The introduction of such duties is the result of a timely response by the Government of Ukraine to unfair competition on the part of Chinese manufacturers in the Ukrainian fasteners market, which will allow the national manufacturers to start eliminating the effects of dumped imports from China,” commented Ilyashev & Partners Partner Olena Omelchenko. “This decision is extremely important for domestic industry in the midst of world trade wars and economic crisis. We are glad that the Ministry of Economy and the Interdepartmental Commission are responding to business problems and are ready to make extremely important decisions to preserve jobs in the country.”

    According to Ilyashev & Partners, “the provisional anti-dumping duty has been imposed for a period of four months from the date of publication of the relevant decision of the Interdepartmental Commission in the Uriadovyi Kurier. The provisional anti-dumping duty will be levied by the customs authorities regardless of the payment of other taxes and fees (mandatory payments). The application of provisional anti-dumping measures will not create obstacles to the customs clearance of goods.”

    The aforementioned decision is aimed at establishing fair competition in the Ukrainian market, increasing production and sales by the national manufacturers, preserving existing and increasing the number of new jobs, as well as increasing the future investments in Ukrainian industry.

    Editor’s Note: On September 29, 2020, Ilyashev & Partners announced that “subject to the results of the investigation on imports to Ukraine of steel fasteners originating in the People’s Republic of China the team of International Trade Practice at Ilyashev & Partners … has secured the application of definitive anti-dumping measures.”

    Subsequently, Asters announced that it, acting on behalf of Ukraine’s Fastexim Association (as well as “a number of Chinese exporters and a major Ukrainian importer”), had achieved “the exclusion of several product varieties from the product subject to the anti-dumping duty, the decrease of the country-wide duty from 93.64% to 67.4%, and secured the lowest individual duty of 32.47% for the producer/exporter represented by Asters.” The firm’s team was led by Partner Alexey Pustovit and included Counsel Olesia Kryvetska and Associates Ivan Yaremchuk, Tetiana Bebik, Yelyzaveta Herasymchuk, and Slava Opeida.

  • AGA Partners and Avellum Reframe Relationship as Alliance

    AGA Partners and Avellum have announced that the two Ukrainian firms, which merged almost two years ago, will officially separate, continuing their relationship as an alliance.

    The firms merged in July of 2018 (as reported by CEE Legal Matters on July 9, 2018). “As of today,” Avellum announced on May 26, 2020, “AGA Partners team resumes operating under its brand.”

    According to a statement on the Avellum website, “the partners of both firms have made this joint decision to meet the present day challenges and new goals that each team has set for themselves. The alliance format will allow a more flexible approach to the legal market strategies of both firms, and maintain a close cooperation on joint projects.”

    “We stay good friends with AGA partners and will continue to cooperate on common projects in the future,” said Avellum Managing Partner Mykola Stetsenko.”

  • Ukraine: New Initiatives in IP Protection in the Pharma Sector

    In the European Commission’s January 8 Report on the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights in third countries, Ukraine was identified as a Priority 2 country. This category includes countries with systematic problems in the area of intellectual property protection and enforcement, causing significant harm to EU countries.

    Ukraine became quite infamous in the intellectual property right (IPR) protection area on the pharmaceutical market due to repeated cases of invention patent protection infringements, violations of protected industrial design or trademarks, and copying of packaging by generic producers, which could be confusing to consumers and harmful for the holders of IPR.

    An illustrative case of ineffective IPR protection was a threatened investment arbitration by Gilead Sciences Inc., in which Gilead Sciences Inc. claimed that the Ukrainian state authority registered a generic drug bypassing Gilead Science’s IPR on the innovative drug Sovaldi. The investment arbitration claim was eventually averted after Ukraine agreed to a settlement.

    Now, Ukraine is about to introduce significant changes to the IPR regulations that may improve IPR protection on the country’s pharmaceutical market. Draft law No. 2259 (the “Patent Legislation Reform Draft”), which has already passed its first reading in the Ukrainian Parliament, is designed to increase competition between pharmaceutical producers and combat IPR abuse. Significantly, it introduces provisions designed to combat so-called “evergreen” patents and implements the Bolar provision to enhance the access of generic products to the market.   

    Combating “Evergreen” Patents

    Due to lack of any regulation, evergreening had been used by drug producers as a strategy to extend the lifetime of patent protection by presenting minor changes, for example, to the form of drugs.

    Now, in an attempt to combat evergreening, the Patent Legislation Reform Draft specifically withholds IPR protection from some substances, like salts, ethers, combinations, polymorphs, metabolites, and so on. as well as from new uses of an existing medicinal product.

    In addition, the Patent Legislation Reform Draft provides for post-grant opposition proceedings to allow challenges to granted patents by third parties in an administrative process. 

    Implementation of the Bolar Provision

    The Bolar provision is a safe harbor exemption that allows a generic producer to register its product straight after expiry of patent protection of the original drug, thus reducing the time for bringing a product to the market and giving consumers the opportunity to get faster access to treatment.

    While the Bolar provision had not been previously implemented into the Ukrainian IPR regulations, now the Patent Legislation Reform Draft specifically prescribes that production of pharmaceuticals protected by patent by generic producers does not constitute violation of IPRs. However, generic producers will be allowed to sell their drugs only after expiry of additional patent protection of the original drug. 

    Parallel Imports as a Tool to Enhance Competition on the Pharmaceuticals Market

    In addition to the Patent Legislation Reform Draft, draft law No. 2089 (the “Parallel Imports Draft”) is currently under active discussion in the Parliament. If adopted, it will significantly change competition conditions on the market, especially regarding so-called “monopolistic” drugs, i.e., those that are not interchangeable with any other products.

    Under the Parallel Imports Draft, importers from other countries will be allowed to import drugs registered in their countries to Ukraine, only updating packaging to Ukrainian legal requirements. While such parallel imports may undoubtedly increase competition on the distribution level and allow patients to purchase drugs at fair market prices, there are concerns that introduction of parallel imports may undermine IPR protection of drugs. However, due to constant attempts of Ukrainian stakeholders to enhance competition on the pharmaceutical market, it is highly likely that the Parliament will eventually support this initiative. 

    Ultimately, these initiatives are mostly about finding the desirable balance between IPR of pharmaceutical companies, which are trying to protect their incomes and cover material costs for the elaboration of innovative drugs, and protection of end customers. At the same time, as under the EU-Ukraine association agreement Ukraine is obliged to enhance toe level of IPR protection and enforcement, further progress and developments in this area are inevitable.

    By Anna Pogrebna, Partner, and Naida Shykhkerimova, Associate, CMS Reich-Rohrwig Hainz, Kyiv

    This Article was originally published in Issue 7.3 of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

  • Compensation for Curtailments of Renewable Generation in Ukraine

    As of November 2019, certain RES producers have been intermittently forced to reduce their output or halt production of electrical energy altogether under the commands of Ukraine’s transmission system operator, NEC Ukrenergo. DTEK, along with several other large market players led the call for limitations. Many of the country’s RES producers have become alarmed.

    According to current legislation, the transmission system operator is obliged to, and has the right, to balance Ukraine’s energy system. This includes enforcing a reduction, or completely stopping electricity production.

    Such commands are selectively applied to different RES producers.  Big generation stations with a capacity of 50 MW or more are usually targeted because, in the opinion of the transmission system operator, their curtailment  can help to instantly balance the system and quickly resolve the operational security issue.

    The right to place curtailment orders in relation to RES producers may be applied by the transmission system operator in case when options to reduce the workload of all other market participants have been used by the transmission system operator.

    Furthermore, the law establishes that the value of all the electricity that was not generated due to the curtailment must be reimbursed in full to the RES producer, in accordance with either the established “green” tariff or the auction price (whichever is applicable). 

    However, no by-laws have been adopted to regulate the procedure for curtailment compensations. For instance, as of today neither rules to calculate the amount of the electricity that could be produced by a specific energy source, nor the sources from which respective compensations shall be made, are available. 

    The position of the transmission system operator has been that absence of the respective detailed order on curtailment compensation shall be the basis for no reimbursements for RES producers. 

    Such an approach is not acceptable for the market players. In response, they have asked to discuss and regulate the matter together with the transmission system operator.

    As the result of several months of work, a methodology for calculating unprocessed electricity has been developed and filed to the regulator for approval:

      1. Sources of funds for curtailment compensation will comprise the transmission system operator’s transmission tariff and placed within a fee for an increase of the share of electricity produced from RES’ as its component.
      2. The curtailment compensation will be reimbursed by the Guaranteed Buyer within imbalance settlement arrangements in its balancing group. Amount of curtailment compensation shall be based on lost output calculated in accordance with the methodology for curtailment calculation and “green” tariff approved by the regulator for the respective RES producer. In turn, the Guaranteed Buyer and the RES producers shall conclude contracts on reimbursement for the share of service cost for electricity imbalance settlement. After introduction of responsibility for imbalances, the RES producers will receive curtailment compensation reduced by the amount of imbalances payment due by them. 
      3. Methodology for curtailment calculations will establish specifics of curtailment calculations for different RES technologies, in particular, daily generation patterns, weather conditions, etc.

    Critical issues

    The draft methodology is currently being processed by the regulator. However, another critical issue for RES producers has surfaced. 

    In the course of negotiations between the Ukrainian Government and RES producers on the feed-in tariff restructuring schemes, the government appears to have discovered a weak point in the curtailment compensation clauses, which allows it to manipulate them to make RES producers apply voluntary restructuring.

    Namely, it is suggested that those RES producers that do not agree to the feed-in tariff restructuring will not be entitled to curtailment compensation. It is worth mentioning that no capped amount of possible curtailments will be prescribed. Those RES producers that do agree to restructuring will be entitled for curtailment compensation.

    Regardless of whether RES producers and the government reach a consensus on the FIT restructuring, it is expected that the draft law on changes to Ukraine’s renewable legislation will be filed to the parliament no later than the end of May. Currently, all sector market players have frozen in anticipation and are hoping for the least harmful scenario.

    By Max Lebedev, Partner, and Taras Lytovchenko, Counsel, GOLAW

  • Volodymyr Zelensky: Servant of the People?

    Before being elected President of Ukraine last May, Volodymyr Zelensky had virtually no experience in public office. Despite his inexperience – or perhaps because of it – over 73% of the electorate concluded that the comedian and entertainer was the right man to replace Petro Poroshenko, the previous President, and now Zelensky finds himself, at 41, leading an entire nation.

    Life Imitates Art

    Volodymyr Zelensky was born in 1978 to an engineer mother and a cybernetics and computer hardware professor father. He holds a degree in law from the Kryvyi Rih Institute of Economics at the Kryvyi Rih National University, but he never practiced law.

    “His story began as a stand-up comedian in various comedy shows,” says Avellum Co-Managing Partner Mykola Stetsenko, “and one of those shows evolved into a very popular production.” That show, called Servant of the People, ran for three years and starred Zelensky in a prophetic role. According to Stetsenko, strikingly, “the show was about a high school teacher who ends up becoming the President of Ukraine and deals with all of the country’s problems.”

    “The main character in the show, which Zelensky portrayed, goes on a rant about how corrupt the country is and how badly it’s managed,” remembers Graham Conlon, Managing Partner of CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang in Ukraine. “In the show, the rant goes viral overnight and he gets elected to office rather accidentally. Once President, he enacts reforms that change the country.” Conlon reflects. “Little did we know that, sometime later, Zelensky would be in the exact same position in real life.”

    Servant of the People was viewed widely in Ukraine, with episodes posted on YouTube and available on Netflix. “The TV depicted Zelensky as a reasonable, patriotic, and ethical man,” says Stetsenko. “He spoke to a lot of people’s core values and, consequently, a lot of people believed that he was the right choice to lead the country in real life. The traits of the character and the man got comingled.”

    Stetsenko says that the show helped Zelensky develop a reputation as a straight shooter. According to him, it seemed that “people took to this kind of talk, to having somebody completely outside of politics calling things the way they were.” Zelensky took his success, and that reputation, to heart. “He said that he was so successful in business and that he thought it was time he did something good for the country,” Stetsenko recalls. “He was well connected to a lot of people in the Government back then and he had the support of the business elites and the oligarchs – so the idea that he should run gathered a lot of traction really fast.”

    “All of a sudden, after the Servant of the People became so popular, everybody was talking about him running, which caught me by surprise,” says Dentons Partner Adam Mycyk. “To be honest, I never really assumed that he had a realistic chance of winning, but it seems to be the case that a lot of folks misjudged how unpopular Poroshenko was – which became very apparent on election day.”

    “I think that everything started back in 2015 when Zelensky and his friends saw the positive reaction of the public to the show,” says Vladimir Sayenko, Partner at Sayenko Kharenko, though he notes that “Zelenksy himself says that he made the decision [to run] much later, in 2018.”

    For whatever reason, Zelensky’s role as an outsider without a real track record in politics helped him (as it had a similar political novice in the United States several years earlier). “Opinion polls quickly showed that people were fed up with the old breed of politicians and demanded radical changes,” Sayenko adds. “Society quickly became polarized, and people voted against candidates that they despised, rather than for a candidate that they thought to be fit for the role. Zelensky managed to play on these sentiments very well. His campaign was all about emotions.”

    In the weeks leading up to election day Zelensky was given significant exposure by the Ukrainian media. “He clearly had the support of the major TV channels, he had a smart approach to campaigning on social media, and Servant of the People aired on the 1+1 channel all the time,” Stetsenko recalls. Capitalizing on his popularity, he says, Zelensky initiated some “new moves” for the Ukrainian political arena, such as proposing and then participating in the first live presidential debate in the country’s history.

    The People Speak

    On April 21, 2019, Zelensky won a second round of voting, beating Poroshenko in a landslide. “The people, ordinary citizens, were ecstatic – but the overall reaction was a bit less enthusiastic,” reports Stetsenko, who notes that parts of the country’s business community remained skeptical about Zelensky’s fitness for the role. “He had no experience in politics,” Stetsenko points out, “and he still had not, at the time, articulated his political goals and affiliations. Nobody knew his masterplan – or even if he had one!”

    “I think he is generally a capable and a smart guy, but he is not an expert in state administration, macro-economy, or the political process,” agrees Olexiy Soshenko, Managing Partner of Redcliffe and Partners in Kyiv. Still, Soshenko notes, despite President Zelensky’s relative inexperience, he gets substantial expert help from his advisors.

    Mycyk agrees, stating that the new administration “seems to have a young, energetic team – you can clearly see from some of them that they’re serious, methodical, and have a good approach.” According to Mycyk, this team composition sends out a positive signal when it comes to reforms, and he points to a recent digitalization initiative as a great example of this. “There’s a concept of a country on a smartphone – digital passports, driving licenses, and the like – being completely digital, backed by a blockchain, all with the aim of combating corruption and making things more transparent overall, especially when dealing with government officials.” Mycyk feels that, even though making this happen may be a tall order, it clearly signals a proper direction.

    And indeed, Sayenko reports, “so far, the business community appears to be generally satisfied with the liberal statements coming from Zelensky and his team. The elections were very civilized, with no major incidents reported and the transition of power was smooth. The absence of significant public protests, a stable currency, adequate GDP growth – all contribute to the overall positive atmosphere.”

    This sense of an administration able to get things done seems to have transalted well to all aspects of President Zelensky’s political presence – on July 21, 2019, less than three months after winning the presidency, his political party, also named Servant of the People, won a commanding 254 out of 450 seats in the Parliament, putting Zelensky in a strong position, both executively and legislatively, to enact change in the country.

    Moving Forward at Speed

    The first thing President Zelensky’s administration did, after winning a majority in the Parliament, was to move forward with an aggressive legislative agenda. “Quite a few good laws were adopted, even though I hoped for a bit more on this front,” says Stetsenko. “But it’s good that this administration finished some things that the previous one started.” Stetsenko points particularly to the creation of an effective legislative framework for concessions and privatizations of Ukrainian companies. Additionally, he says, “Zelensky is pushing quite hard to enact land reform and lift the moratorium on selling private land.”

    “Ukraine is one of the very few countries in the world that has a ban on selling land – releasing it will increase the GDP and also finally provide people with a wider scale of use of their property,” Conlon explains. “People can then use the land as security for bank loans. It will open up the economy.” Of course, nothing comes without some controversy, and Conlon concedes that, “there is, on the other hand, some nervousness among the population about this opening the door to foreigners acquiring a lot of land – and hence it is looking likely that foreigners will be excluded from buying, at least initially.”

    And the possibility of seeing significant amounts of Ukrainian land scooped up by foreigners, unsurprisingly, did not slip by the opposition. “Yulia Tymoshenko, the former Prime Minister and one of the most vocal opponents to President Zelensky, is furious about the land reform,” Stetsenko says. “And she’s quite firmly expressing this in the Parliament.”

    Nonetheless, it appears that President Zelensky is likely to go through with the reform in this sector – and a number of others. “He, together with a few stakeholders, is in a position of almost total control of all branches of power,” says Soshenko, “and he is tackling a number of tasks.” Soshenko reports that Zelensky’s initiatives are already bearing fruit, with, as an example, the country’s new Law on Concessions allowing foreign capital to move in. “The new law was well received and we already have two pilot concession projects for a couple of seaports; we have a number of grain terminals expanding; the land reform is coming; there are several privatizations for big companies announced – most notably the Odessa Portside Plant.” Still, he warns, it will take more than good intentions. “The previous government attempted to privatize Odessa Portside and a number of other objects, but failed twice – perhaps this administration will succeed.”

    Soshenko reports that the current administration’s attempt to lessen the country’s dependence on Russian minerals is moving forward as well. “The Government is looking to increase the exploration of structurally-owned national resources, including oil and gas, and some steps have been taken in this direction. Currently the government is negotiating production-sharing agreements with a number of investors,” he says. “Additionally, a process to digitalize this area has begun – online licensing regimes for deposits have been introduced, and a new law regarding production sharing agreements was announced as well.”

    And Stetsenko adds that “the Zelensky administration is talking a lot about infrastructure projects – especially connecting the roads around Kyiv to Odesa and connecting Lviv to the EU network of highways – if these come to pass it will be a huge boost to the economy.”

    In their entirety, the administration’s initiatives have been well received by the business community in Ukraine, Sayenko says. That community, he says, “does not expect any special treatment from the government – it just wants less interference, less pressure.” And Zelensky’s proposals could do just that. “Everything is driven by the need to attract additional investment into the country’s economy. As long as these priorities remain unchanged, I am sure that the overall business atmosphere will continue to be very positive,” Sayenko says.

    Ultimately, early reviews of the former comedian’s first steps as President are encouraging. “Volodymyr Zelensky is doing a much better job than I expected him to,” Sayenko says, though he notes that Zelensky’s “lack of relevant experience is an issue.” Still, he admits to some optimism. “Most of the messages from Zelensky sound very positive and encouraging. The number of initiatives that come from the ‘servants of the people’ is also impressive and they appear to be driven by a sincere desire to improve the country.”

    Inheriting a Challenge

    Among Zelensky’s mandates is to complete the comprehensive reform of Ukraine’s judiciary and legal system that began several years ago. “From the business perspective one of the big priorities has, for a long time now, been the establishment of the rule of law and the efficacy of the court system – that’s the biggest problem to tackle,” says Mycyk.

    “The most important thing is improving the rule of law,” agrees Conlon. “If the administration can achieve that, foreign investors will come in even greater numbers than now and the investment appetite for the country will grow.” He cautions that, in order to move the country forward, some difficult decisions will need to be made – which may not be so popular with the Ukrainian people in the short term. But, he says, “if President Zelensky follows through on the rule of law reform – the potential upside is huge.”

    Soshenko notes that “big business, at least the majority of it, feels some optimism surrounding these reforms and they will try to support the administration’s efforts.” He feels that the overall expunging of corruption is critical and and is sure that the “majority of responsible businesses will cooperate.”

    Not everyone is on board with all the proposals, of course. “The judicial reform may be the true hot potato for this administration,” Stetsenko says. He notes that one element of Zelensky’s program involves capping Supreme Court judges’ salaries. “It can be debated if this reduction is a good thing in the long run,” Stetsenko says, “as it would seem to be the case that people of Ukraine universally believe that higher salaries mean more independence and less corruption.” In addition, he says, “the Ukrainian Constitutional Court held these proposals to be unconstitutional.”

    Sayenko says he’s not enthusiastic about the proposal either. “As a lawyer, I cannot support the reduction of the number of judges in the Supreme Court of Ukraine and a decrease of their salaries.”

    Others, though they applaud the effort, concede they remain someowhat skeptical about the likelihood of success. “The administration may be setting itself up for failure,” Mycyk says. “There’s still a fair amount of oligarch rule in politics and the economy, and strong influence – if only a perception of it. It is of the utmost importance for a country to have strong governance. Increased reliance on political and personal connections distorts the market, which has been the case here for a long time, unfortunately.”

    So Far So Good

    A little under a year into his first term, the general consensus seems to be that President Zelensky is not only afloat, but – all things considered – doing well. The reform packages are well underway, and the business community seems to view him positively.

    “I can’t say I was really optimistic when he got elected, but then again I didn’t know who he was and what he stood for,” smiles Mycyk. “But I like listening to him. He’s a straightforward person and he seems to know what needs to be done. Even with goals set as high as the ones he set out – there’s a pretty good chance that with the right team and strong support he’ll have a good first term, maybe even a second one!”

    Still, Mycyk notes that it may be a bit early to judge, given the fact that the parliamentary elections were a little over six months ago. “There was a feeling of flying without a flight plan, in the beginning, with President Zelensky announcing something in the ballpark of USD 50 billion in FDI in the first five years along with 40% growth.” Mycyk describes this as a tall order, even with a detailed and worked-out plan. “Given these targets, some skepticism may be valid, but only time will tell.”

    “He’s still polling quite high – not around 73% he had when he won, but well over 50%,” Stetsenko reports. “He is very patriotic and very pro-EU – which seems to go along the same lines as the old administrations’ direction of governing. With a solid parliamentary majority, President Zelensky is in much more control than Poroshenko ever was.” This unusual support, Stetsenko says, makes President Zelensky one of the strongest presidents in Ukrainian history.

    Soshenko agrees that most of the maneuvers the President has made so far demonstrate a real business sense. “He did run a proper business before he got elected, so he does have the necessary experience to make common sense calls in this aspect. He’s interested in attracting foreign investors, in growing the GDP – and he may well be well-equipped to achieve these goals.”

    Conlon agrees. “President Zelensky needs to continue to secure the support of his electorate going forward. If the country brings in foreign investors, as the administration hopes will be the case, the people will feel the difference.” Higher wages, infrastructure developments, and a stronger rule of law are all, he says, “building blocks, which are linked, so it’s a good thing this Administration seems to be taking them seriously.”

    Of course, things are changing quickly and dramatically in Ukraine, as around the world, as economies struggle to adapt to the growing global health crisis. The effect on Zelensky’s administration and ability to affect the kinds of change he has promised is, ultimately, unclear. Never, it appears, has “only time will tell” been less of a cliché and more of a truism. Ukraine, like the rest of the world, is holding its breath.

    This Article was originally published in Issue 7.3 of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

     

  • Plan B for Employers in Crisis: Redundancy Plan

    Quarantine restrictions implemented by the Ukrainian Government due to the COVID-19 pandemic had a sensible impact on the business in Ukraine, which can’t disappear without any trace. A lot of companies tried or are still trying to find a reasonable solution in order to reduce expenses on staff, as well to optimize their business processes and revise organizational structures.

    Unfortunately, switching from full-time to part-time or decreasing salaries hasn’t been an ideal option for some companies. Thus, under such circumstances they have to think about plan B. Although a redundancy plan is a good option to optimize staff during the business downturn, the process requires long preparatory work and can’t be implemented instantly.

    What does staff reduction mean for business? First, it’s an opportunity to regroup employees within similar positions and professions in order to keep the most qualified team members in place. Secondly, it is payroll and expenses optimization for the company.

    According to Article 64 of the Commercial Code of Ukraine, a company independently determines its organizational structure, sets the number of employees and staff schedule. The reduction of the number of employees and staff size is a type of changes in the organization and labour which serves as a standalone ground for the termination of employment at the initiative of an employer under the Labour Code of Ukraine (namely, Section 1 of Paragraph 1). This means that, in case of a dispute, courts should verify if there actually was staff reduction, but cannot discuss rationale for that.

    A standard procedure for staff reduction in a company where there is no trade union includes the following steps:

    1. Taking a decision on staff reduction
    2. Identifying employees subject to dismissal
    3. Notifying the employees on staff reduction
    4. Offering alternative vacant positions to the employees
    5. Dismissing the employees

    The following aspects require special attention during implementation of staff reduction: 

    • Identifying employees which are subject to staff reduction. When deciding on the list of employees to be laid off, an employer should keep in mind the protected categories of employees and employees having a priority right to retain the job.

    In particular, the following categories of employees cannot be dismissed due to staff redundancy, unless the company is completely liquidated: 

    • pregnant women, women having children under 3 (6) years old, single mothers having a child under 14 years old or a disabled child;
    • fathers growing up children without mother, a custodial, and a foster or a carer parent;
    • employees called for or enrolled in the military service for a special period, called for military training or military reserve service;
    • members of a trade union’s elected body within one year upon termination of their mission within the trade union;
    • employees under 18 years old – such employees can be dismissed only in exceptional cases and are subjects to prior consent of a local children’s service;
    • young specialists.

    If employees hold the same position, the priority to retain the job is given to the employee with higher qualification and efficiency. If qualification and efficiency of employees are equal, then criteria established by Article 42 of the Labour Code of Ukraine and special laws regulating the status of certain categories of employees should be taken into account.

    • Notifying the employees and offering alternative vacant positions. According to Article 492 of the Labour Code of Ukraine, an employee must be personally notified on the contemplated layoff at least two months in advance. Although the term “layoff” (in Ukrainian – вивільнення) is not defined, analysis of the law shows that it is used in the meaning of dismissal under Section 1 of Paragraph 1 of Article 40 of the Labour Code of Ukraine.

    The following considerations should be taken into account by an employer while notifying the employees on staff reduction:

    • The notice must be executed in writing, signed by an authorized person of the employer and properly delivered to the employee respecting the notice period. A period of vacation, sick leave or another employee’s absence at work is included in the mentioned two months’ period.

    The delivery by registered mail (including that with acknowledgement of receipt) is usually considered an appropriate method of notification. In practice, employees often try to avoid the receipt of the notice and refuse to sign it. In such case, the employer may ask at least two other employees to act as witnesses and execute a statement recording the employee’s refusal to sign the notice. Although not directly required by the law, the above precautions will minimize risks of challenging the lawfulness of dismissal in the future.

    • Together with the notification about the layoff, the employer must offer the employee other vacant positions within the company. The employee should be offered available vacancies corresponding to their profession and specialization, or, if such vacancies are absent, another job which the employee will be able to perform based on qualification and health condition (including positions requiring lower qualification or providing lower salary). Importantly, emerging vacant positions must be offered during the whole notice period, i.e. until the dismissal of the employee.

    The employee’s dismissal as a result of staff reduction is allowed only if the transfer to another position is impossible: if there are no relevant vacant positions or if the employee refused to be transferred to another offered position. It is recommended to record the employee’s refusal in writing.

    The Ukrainian law does not clearly regulate the situation when several employees who are subject to staff reduction apply for the same vacant position. No preemptive right is provided by the law for the transfer to another position. This means that the final decision should rest with the employer. Thus, vacancies may be filled on a first-come-first-serve basis (with the first employee applying for the transfer to the relevant position) or depending on greater adequacy of the employee to the position’s requirements.

    Severance packages

    In case of the staff reduction, an employer is obliged to pay to the redundant employee a severance payment in the amount equal to at least one average monthly salary of such employee (Article 44 of the Labour Code of Ukraine). А collective bargaining agreement or the employment agreement may envisage higher amount of the severance payment.

    In addition, according to the Law of Ukraine On the Status and Social Protection of Citizens Affected by the Chernobyl Disaster employees who suffered from Chornobyl accident of categories I and II, and participants of liquidations of consequences of Chornobyl accident of category III are entitled to additional dismissal aid (compensation) in the amount of three average monthly salaries. Such compensation is paid by the employer in addition to the severance payment mentioned above and is afterwards compensated to the employer from the state budget.

    The severance payment and additional dismissal compensation to Chornobyl victims should be paid on the dismissal date on top of the salary for the current month, compensation for unused days of vacation and other payments due to the employee. 

    Mass layoff

    If the planned staff reduction falls under definition of mass layoff, it will require additional actions from the employer.

    According to the Ukrainian legislation, the mass layoff is one-time occurrence or during

    1. a) one month: release of 10 or more employees at an enterprise with 20 to 100 employees / release of 10% and more of employees at an enterprise with 101 to 300 employees, or

    (b) three months: release of 20% or more of employees at the enterprise regardless of the number of employees.

    If the planned staff reduction is qualified as a mass layoff, the employer is obligated to notify a territorial body of the State Employment Service of Ukraine. Such notification shall be submitted no later than two months before the staff reduction. It is necessary to notify the State Employment Service of Ukraine not only before beginning of staff reduction.     

    Trade union

    The trade union of the company shall be informed about the planned staff reduction no later than 3 months in advance. The employer should provide the trade union with the written information about reasons of planned dismissals, as well as about number and categories of employees to whom it may apply and terms of dismissals (deadlines). Moreover, the employer should have consultation with a trade union regarding measures for preventing or minimizing dismissals or mitigating the negative effects for employees.

    If the employee who is going to be dismissed under staff reduction is a member of a trade union, obtaining a prior consent of the elected body of the trade union is binding. The Ukrainian legislation prescribes a special procedure and timelines of obtaining such consent. It is essential for the employer to follow all prescribed procedures in timelines provided by the legislation. If the employee is a member of several trade unions within one company, the consent of the one addressed by the employer is sufficient.   

    Rights and guarantees of redundant employees

    The legislation provides for the following guarantees and rights to dismissed employees:

    • An employee cannot be dismissed during the period of sick leave or vacation, except for in case of complete liquidation of the company. The dismissal should be scheduled for the first working day of the employee after the sick leave or vacation
    • Upon employee’s request he or she should be provided with unused days of vacations before the dismissal. If the vacation lasts after the planned dismissal date, such date should be transferred to the last day of vacation 
    • An employee has the right to receive unemployment benefits by applying for employment to the State Employment Service of Ukraine 
    • An employee within one year after the termination of the employment has the right to enter into an employment contract in the case of return employment, if the company hires employees of similar qualifications (positions)

    In addition, employers at their own discretion may increase the amount of severance payment or add some additional benefits. In view of the mentioned above, the staff reduction is a quite a long process which needs to be well-planned in advance in order to avoid any difficulties and disputes in the future.

    ***

    Quarantine restrictions did have negative implications for many businesses and may potentially push some of them into restructurings in the future. The proper anticipation and projection of various options is an important element for minimization of negative impact. This we see as a main purpose of the redundancy plan which shall be considered as hard but necessary measures for saving the business.

    By Inna Kostrytska, Senior Associate, and Yuliya Bleshmudt, Associate, Integrites

    Editorial Note (July 8): At the request of the authoring firm, the article was subsequently edited to update reporting requirements towards the territorial body of the State Employment Service of Ukraine.

  • Integrites Advises Sibelco on Acquisition of Euromineral and Kurdyumovsky Plant in Ukraine

    Integrites has advised Sibelco on the acquisition of Ukrainian clay producers Euromineral LLC and Kurdyumovsky Plant PrJSC. The seller was advised by in-house counsel Yana Petrova.

    According to Integrites, “Sibelco is a Belgium-based global material solutions company operating over 170 production sites in more than 30 countries. The acquisition of the facilities which have officially become part of Sibelco helped the client to grow its positions on the regional market and increase its access to reserves of raw materials.”

    Integrites’s team was supervised by Partner Illya Tkachuk and included Partner Serhiy Shershun, Senior Associate Inna Kostrytska, and Associates Yulia Bleshmudt, Alina Trofimova, Kateryna Bunina, Mykola Boichuk, and Anna Garbar.

  • Esquires Successful for Diezelmashservice KR in VAT Disputes

    Ukraine’s Esquires law firm has successfully defended the interests of Diezelmashservice KR LLC in the first-instance Dnipropetrovsk District Administrative Court and then the Third Administrative Court of Appeal in a VAT dispute with Ukraine’s tax authorities.

    Diezelmashservice KR specializes in repairing and maintaining transport and industrial equipment. According to Esquires, the firm has successfully represented Diezelmashservice KR in three separate cases involving assertions by the tax authorities that the company had understated value added tax by over USD 100,000, with decisions handed down in July and November of 2019 and in May, 2020.  

    Esquire’s team included Partner Viktoria Kovalchuk and Senior Associate Andrii Kravchuk.

  • Antika Successful for Persha in Subrogation Dispute

    Ukraine’s Antika law firm has successfully defended the interests of the Persha insurance company in a dispute involving the recovery of funds by subrogation.

    According to Antika, “the claimant, in this case, is another well-known insurer who unjustifiably paid insurance indemnity to his client for lost goods and tried to compensate for this amount at the expense of Persha, which insured the carrier’s liability. Thanks to … [a] clear legal position and effective judicial representation, [Antika’s] lawyers proved the claimant’s claims to be unfounded, and therefore the court refused to satisfy the claim.”

    Antika’s team included Partners Alexey Kot and Maxim Korchagin and Senior Associate Mikhail Voitsekhovskyi.

  • Kinstellar Advises UMG Investments on Acquisition of Minority Stake in Feednova

    Kinstellar has advised UMG Investments on the acquisition of a minority stake in Feednova LLC, a Ukrainian company focusing on the production of feed additives for farm animals and pets, and the subsequent establishment of a joint venture with Effective Investments Group and other stakeholders of Feednova.

    As a result of the transaction, Feednova will become the first independent operator in Ukraine to process raw materials from external suppliers for the production of high-protein feed additives and animal fats for farm animals and pets. The production complex will have four state-of-the-art production lines and five boilers with a capacity of over 220 tons of raw materials and 90 tons of finished products per day.

    “We are pleased that our investment in Feednova will help to create the first independent operator of animal by-products processing in Ukraine,” commented Andriy Gorokhov, the CEO of UMG Investments. “We believe that participation in the Feednova project will allow our portfolio company Recycling Solutions to realize its vast experience and best practices in waste management projects to the fullest extent possible.”

    According to Kinstellar, “UMG Investments is an investment company that establishes and develops businesses with high growth potential. Today, UMG Investments manages portfolio companies in the following areas: mineral resources, by-product and waste management, and industrial products and services. The market value of assets under the company’s management exceeds USD 500 million. Feednova is a Ukrainian company, which following the completion of construction works will operate the first high-protein feed additives and animal fats production plant in Ukraine, located in in the city of Busk in the Lviv Region.”

    Kinstellar’s team was led by Partner Iryna Nikolayevska and included Senior Associates Viktoriia Dobrynska and Oleh Andreikiv and Mid-Level Associate Julia Palaida.