International Commercial Arbitration in Ukraine: Problems of Jurisdiction and Recognition of Institutional Autonomy of Arbitration Courts

Abstract

The article provides a comprehensive analysis of the jurisdictional challenges of international commercial arbitration in Ukraine amid European integration and martial law. Drawing on doctrinal, comparative-legal and case analyses, as well as ICAC institutional reports, it identifies key issues: blurred boundaries between state and arbitral jurisdiction; restrictive interpretations of arbitration agreements and public policy at the recognition and enforcement stage; and inconsistent application of the Kompetenz-Kompetenz doctrine. It is shown that, despite the functional resilience of institutions (ICAC/MAC), excessive judicial control undermines the institutional autonomy of arbitration and legal predictability for investors. The paper substantiates proposals to improve legislation and practice: to enshrine the priority of arbitration in deciding its own jurisdiction and defer judicial review of an arbitration agreement’s validity until an award on the merits; to broaden arbitrability (including disputes over digital assets); to codify rules for international and domestic arbitration in a single act; and to deepen procedural digitalisation and strengthen institutional expertise. It concludes that alignment with the 1958 New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law, coupled with calibrated judicial oversight, is a prerequisite for genuine institutional autonomy of arbitral tribunals and enhanced confidence in arbitration in Ukraine.