On July 16, 2026, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) confirmed that the decisions of the Russian occupation authorities to deprive citizens of their property rights to land plots in Crimea did not create legal consequences, and their legal owners retained their property rights, the Ministry of Justice reported on Monday.
"The ECHR established that the decisions of the occupation courts regarding the case Bazhenov and Others v. Russia and Ukraine (application No. 20092/18 and 11 others) had no legal basis and therefore could not terminate the applicants’ right of ownership to the land plots," the Ministry of Justice said in a statement.
At the same time, the European Court noted that the Russian courts used alleged violations of Ukrainian land legislation only as a pretext for the subsequent application of Russian law, which cannot be considered law within the meaning of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
Commissioner for the European Court of Human Rights Margarita Sokorenko emphasized that the ECHR’s decision has significance far beyond the specific land case. "The ECHR confirmed that the mass deprivation of property rights in occupied Crimea is an illegal practice of the occupying state, which contradicts both the Convention and the norms of international humanitarian law. Therefore, the application of Russian legislation in occupied Crimea does not create any legal consequences, and property rights acquired in accordance with the legislation of Ukraine remain valid," she said.
Importantly, the ECHR noted that regardless of whether the initial granting of land complied with Ukrainian legislation, the deprivation of property contradicted Article 46 of the Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, which is an annex to the IV Hague Convention of 1907, establishing a prohibition on the confiscation of private property in occupied territory. The ECHR also concluded that the applicants remain the legal owners of their land plots, and the deprivation of their right of ownership is a continuing violation.
As the Ministry of Justice noted, the ECHR decision develops the legal conclusions formulated by the Court in the interstate case "Ukraine v. Russia (re Crimea)" and confirms that the illegal application of Russian legislation in the temporarily occupied territory does not create legal consequences, and property rights acquired in accordance with the legislation of Ukraine are subject to international protection.
