Ukrainian Deputy Foreign Minister for European Integration Olena Zerkal has called on companies to file lawsuits with international courts against the Russian Federation regarding damages after annexation of Crimea so that the price of occupation for Moscow is higher.

"The first decision on compensation for property lost as a result of occupation of Crimea, and the first victory on this section of the legal front," Zerkal wrote on her Facebook page, while commenting on the award on the merits by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague on May 9 in a lawsuit of a group of 19 Ukrainian individuals against Russia on unlawful expropriation of their property.

According to her, despite the fact that the text of the court ruling still remains confidential, it can already be reported that the arbitrators recognized that Russia is responsible for actions in Crimea on the basis of an agreement on mutual protection of investments between Ukraine and Russia, the so-called nationalization by the occupation authorities is a violation of the investment agreement, and that Russia must pay $159 million in compensation to the affected companies, as well as to compensate for the costs associated with the litigation.

"The conclusions for us are the following. The illegal occupation has its price. The burden of aggression will be heavier for Russia. This is only the first victory. A lot of cases of Ukrainian companies, including Naftogaz, Oschadbank, Ukrnafta and PrivatBank, are already under consideration," Zerkal said.

She recalled that this month hearings were also underway on the case of Naftogaz Ukrainy and that the decision was expected in the case of Oschadbank.

"We know that the number of companies that are preparing similar suits is growing. I call on all companies that have lost their property in Crimea to actively fight for compensation for losses," she said.

According to her, despite the fact that the arbitrators do not give an answer to the question of the legal status of Crimea after occupation, because "this is beyond the competence of investment arbitration, but every decision on cases of illegal actions of the Russian Federation on Ukrainian territory brings us closer to the fact that the question of the obvious illegality of the occupation will get its legal assessment."

"Sooner or later we will come to the fact that Russia's aggression will be the subject of legal proceedings," she said, adding that Russia will not be able to avoid responsibility for illegal expropriation.

As reported, on March 23, having consulted the parties, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague declared the hearings in the arbitration started under a lawsuit of Everest Estate LLC (Kyiv), former Board Chairman of PrivatBank Oleksandr Dubilet and 17 other companies against the Russian Federation closed.

"On 2 May 2018, having deliberated, the Tribunal issued its unanimous Award on the Merits, addressing issues pertaining to liability and damages," the court said in a press release issued on May 9.

The court recalled that after the hearing on the merits in this matter was held October from 5 to 6, 2017, the tribunal invited the parties to file post-hearing submissions by December 11, 2017.

On November 11, 2017, the Tribunal posed supplementary questions on valuation to the parties, inviting them to respond in their post-hearing submissions. The claimants filed their post-hearing brief, together with an additional valuation report, on 11 December 2017. The Russian Federation did not file any post hearing submissions, the court said in the press release.

The article of the UNCITRAL (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law) Arbitration Rules 1976 which the tribunal referred to says that the arbitral tribunal may inquire of the parties if they have any further proof to offer or witnesses to be heard or submissions to make and, if there are none, it may declare the hearings closed.

According to the rules, the award shall be made in writing and shall be final and binding on the parties. The parties undertake to carry out the award without delay.

The award may be made public only with the consent of both parties. The arbitral tribunal shall state the reasons upon which the award is based, unless the parties have agreed that no reasons are to be given.

According to the rules, within thirty days after the receipt of the award, either party, with notice to the other party, may request that the arbitral tribunal give an interpretation of the award. The interpretation shall be given in writing within forty-five days after the receipt of the request.

In addition, within thirty days after the receipt of the award, either party, with notice to the other party, may request the arbitral tribunal to correct in the award any errors in computation, any clerical or typographical errors, or any errors of similar nature.