Changing the statute of limitations during wartime: lawyers comment on the practical consequences of the new law

Ukraine has been living in a state of full-scale war for the fourth year. The legal system, like every other sphere, adapts to conditions in which court hearings can be interrupted by air raids, and access to documents or registers is restricted by shelling or occupation. Against this background, the Verkhovna Rada adopted a rather small law, which contains only a few lines, but its importance is limitless, because it concerns a wide range of rights and obligations not only of individuals, but also of legal entities. We are talking about changes in the statute of limitations — one of the foundations of civil justice, which determines how much time a person or company has to defend their right. The innovation has the potential to affect thousands of cases — from property conflicts and inheritance disputes to debt collection.

The editors of IA “FACT” turned to the lawyers of the “Repeshko and Partners” bar association for comments on the essence of the legislative change and its consequences for Ukrainians in wartime conditions.

On May 14, the Verkhovna Rada approved in the second reading draft law No. 11315, which cancels the suspension of the statute of limitations during martial law. Before that, there was a rule according to which these terms were automatically suspended for the entire period of the war – now it will expire. Note that the law will come into effect three months after its publication. It was published in the newspaper “Voice of Ukraine” on June 3, 2025, that is, from September 4, 2025, all statutes of limitation in civil law will “work” as usual.

In the explanatory note to the law, it is stated that in the realities of the protracted martial law, the mechanism of stopping the terms actually lost its meaning. Today, the judicial system is functioning, and citizens who want to defend their rights can do so in the legal field. The authors of the document believe that the maintenance of “frozen” terms no longer corresponds to real conditions. Instead, it is provided that in certain cases, for example, when a person directly participates in hostilities, the court will continue to be able not to apply the statute of limitations – on the basis of part 5 of Article 267 of the Civil Code. Therefore, the legislator returns the validity of the terms to the pre-war logic — taking into account the fact that the justice system is able to guarantee access to the court even in the current conditions.

We remind you that the statute of limitations is a period within which a person can apply to the court with a demand for the protection of his civil right or interest (Article 256 Civil Code of Ukraine, hereinafter – the Central Committee of Ukraine). The general statute of limitations is set at three years (Article 257 of the Civil Code of Ukraine).

The fact is that back in March 2022, and then in August 2023, changes to the CCU were adopted, which in the final version looked as follows:

“During the period of martial law in Ukraine, introduced by the Decree of the President of Ukraine “On the introduction of martial law in Ukraine” dated February 24, 2022 № 64/2022, approved by the Law of Ukraine “On Approval of the Decree of the President of Ukraine “On the Introduction of Martial Law in Ukraine” dated February 24, 2022 № 2102-IX, the statute of limitations specified by this Code shall be suspended for the period of validity of such a state.”

As we can see, the law stopped the running of the statute of limitations for the period of martial law. This means that the time that has passed since the introduction of martial law is not taken into account when calculating the statute of limitations. This approach has been used to protect the rights of citizens when going to court is impossible or difficult due to hostilities or occupation.

However, currently, the legislator proceeds from the fact that, firstly, in the protection of their rights, there should be a reasonable period of time, and secondly, everyone who has the desire and now turns to the court for the protection of their rights. We would like to remind that the jurisdiction of courts that cannot function due to the occupation of territories or the proximity of hostilities has been transferred to other courts in the safe territory of Ukraine. According to the official link – https://supreme.court.gov.ua/supreme/gromadyanam/terutor_pidsudnist/ a list of courts is available, whose territorial jurisdiction was changed due to the impossibility of administering justice during martial law and a list of courts, whose territorial jurisdiction has been restored.

It should be remembered that in addition to the general limitation period of three years, there are other options for limitation periods. The one-year statute of limitations applies, in particular, to claims:

• about collection of penalty (fine, penalty);
• on refutation of false information published in the mass media (in this case, the statute of limitations is calculated from the day this information was published in the mass media or from the day the person learned or could have learned about this information);
• in connection with the defects of the sold goods (Article 681 of the Civil Code of Ukraine – hereinafter the Civil Code of Ukraine);
• on termination of the donation contract (Article 728 of the Civil Code of Ukraine);
• in connection with the transportation of cargo, mail (Article 925 of the Civil Code of Ukraine);
• on challenging the actions of the executor of the will (Article 1293 of the Civil Code of Ukraine);
• on invalidating the decision of the general meeting of the company;
• about compensation for damages in connection with damage to the thing that was transferred for use to the lessee, as well as for claims for compensation for the costs of improving the thing;
• on payment of a check (Article 1106 of the Civil Code of Ukraine);
• on the transfer to the co-owner of the rights and obligations of the buyer in case of violation of the preferential right to purchase a share in the right of joint partial ownership (Article 362 of the Civil Code of Ukraine).

A five-year statute of limitations applies to claims for annulment of a deed committed under the influence of violence or fraud.

The ten-year statute of limitations applies to demands for the application of the consequences of a void deed.

The statute of limitations of four years applies to claims for recognition of assets as unsubstantiated and their collection into state income.

Claims regarding inadequate quality of work performed under a contract are subject to a one-year statute of limitations, and in the case of buildings and structures – three years from the date of acceptance of the work by the customer (Article 863 of the Civil Code of Ukraine).

At the same time, it is worth knowing that according to Art. 261 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, the statute of limitations begins from the day when a person learned or could have learned about the violation of his right or about the person who violated it. At the same time, the statute of limitations is interrupted by the person’s performance of an action, which indicates his recognition of his debt or other obligation. For example: a person borrowed a significant amount of funds from another person by a receipt for a certain period – until December 31, 2020. The debt was not repaid within the specified period. The general three-year statute of limitations begins. The creditor stomps his feet and demands the debtor to return the funds and threatens to go to court.

Finally, on January 30, 2022, the parties reach an agreement and the debtor writes a new receipt, with which he undertakes to repay the debt by December 31, 2022. Therefore, a new three-year statute of limitations begins on January 1, 2023. The statute of limitations is interrupted if a person files a lawsuit against one of several debtors, as well as if the subject of the lawsuit is only a part of the claim to which the plaintiff has the right (this is defined in part 1, 2 of article 264 of the Civil Code of Ukraine).

Thus, the interruption of the statute of limitations provides that as a result of certain actions (or confirmation of the debtor’s recognition of a debt or other obligation, or the creditor’s filing of a lawsuit against one or more debtors), the corresponding period that has begun is terminated. After such an interruption, the limitation period begins anew from the next day after confirmation of the debtor’s recognition of the debt or other obligation or after the creditor files a lawsuit against one or more debtors (this legal position, set out in the decision of the Supreme Court dated May 23, 2018 in case No. 663/2070/15-ts).

In addition, in accordance with Art. 263 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, the statute of limitations stops:

1) if the filing of a claim was prevented by an extraordinary or unavoidable event under the given conditions (force majeure);

2) in case of postponement of the obligation (moratorium) on the grounds established by law;

3) in case of suspension of the law or other legal act regulating the relevant relations;

4) if the plaintiff or the defendant is in the Armed Forces of Ukraine or in other military formations created in accordance with the law and transferred to martial law.

In the event of the occurrence of the specified circumstances, the statute of limitations is suspended for the entire period of existence of these circumstances. From the date of termination of the circumstances that were the basis for stopping the limitation period, the limitation period continues taking into account the time that passed before its suspension. At the same time, leaving the claim in court without consideration does not stop the statute of limitations, nor does it limit the claimant’s right to appeal to the court again with the corresponding claim.

We note that the application for the protection of a civil right or interest must be accepted by the court for consideration, regardless of the expiration of the statute of limitations.

The court applies the statute of limitations only when there are grounds for satisfying the claim. That is, before applying the statute of limitations, the court must find out and specify in the court decision whether the right or legally protected interest of the plaintiff, for the protection of which he appealed to the court, has been violated. If such a right or interest is not violated, the court refuses to satisfy the claim due to its groundlessness. Only if it is established that a person’s right or interest protected by law has really been violated, but the statute of limitations has expired, and the other party to the dispute has made a statement about this, the court will reject the claim due to the expiration of the statute of limitations in the absence of valid reasons for its omission, given by the plaintiff. This is exactly the position taken by the courts when considering disputes (in particular, Resolution of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court dated May 22, 2018 in case No. 369/6892/15-ts, dated October 31, 2018 in case No. 367/6105/16-ts, dated November 7, 2018 in case No. 575/476/16-ts etc).

So, in the event that the court filed a claim for the protection of rights that were subject to the statute of limitations, for example, for the termination of a gift contract beyond the one-year statute of limitations, after two years. In such a case, the plaintiff (donor) must submit to the court simultaneously, in addition to the lawsuit, a statement requesting to renew the statute of limitations, justifying (with the provision of evidence) why exactly the relevant period was missed (the plaintiff was in hospital treatment with a spinal fracture, was in occupation, etc.). The defendant, in turn, must submit an application for the application of the statute of limitations and justify why the statute of limitations cannot be renewed (the plaintiff was in occupation for only one month, etc.). How well-founded this or that statement is, the court will decide, taking into account the written evidence. If the court finds the reasons for missing the statute of limitations to be valid, the violated right is subject to protection.

It should be noted that the question of the validity of these reasons, i.e. the presence of circumstances that, for objective reasons independent of the plaintiff, made it impossible or significantly difficult to file a claim in a timely manner, is decided by the court in each specific case, taking into account the available factual data about such circumstances. As for a physical person, he can document a serious illness, a long stay outside his place of permanent residence (for example, abroad), etc.

We will remind you that this year the issue of the statute of limitations has undergone another change. Currently, there are changes in the course of the statute of limitations in relation to immovable property, namely, the course of the statute of limitations for claims for claim, occupation, recognition of the right to real estate, the right to which is registered in the State Register of Real Property Rights to immovable property, begins from the day of state registration of the right of the person who violated the claimant’s right or the date of transfer to the acquirer (the person who violated the claimant’s right) of real estate, in respect of which at the time of such transfer, the law did not provide for a state right registration of a deed or registration of a right.

Currently, if the title to your property was illegally re-registered, for example, four years ago, and you only found out about it yesterday, you can say goodbye to your property. The starting point is now not “when I found out, or should have found out”, as it was before, but “when the property ownership was registered in the register”. It is from the date of registration in the State Register of Property Rights that the three-year statute of limitations begins to run. 

Although the issue of application of the statute of limitations depends on the circumstances in each specific case, this issue has been repeatedly reviewed by the courts of cassation instance.

According to the legal opinion contained in the resolution of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court dated 26.11.2019 in case No. 914/3224/16, the law does not connect the expiration of the statute of limitations with the adoption of a court decision on the violation of a person’s right. Therefore, the statute of limitations begins from the day when the plaintiff learned or could have learned about the violation of his right, and not from the day when such violation was confirmed by a court decision. The law also does not connect the expiration of the statute of limitations for a vindication lawsuit either with the conclusion of certain deeds regarding the plaintiff’s property, or with the actual transfer of the property by the violator, who illegally took possession of the plaintiff’s property, into the possession of other persons.

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court in Resolution dated September 11, 2019 in case No. 487/10132/14-ts noted that a comparative analysis of the terms “found out” and “could find out” used in Article 261 of the Civil Code of Ukraine gives grounds for a conclusion about the presumption of the possibility and obligation of a person to know about the state of his property rights. Therefore, proving the fact that the plaintiff did not know about the violation of his civil right and for this very reason did not apply for protection to the court is not enough. The plaintiff must also prove that he could not have known about the violation of his civil right.

In practical terms, the new statute of limitations means that all pending legal issues must be resolved as soon as possible. So, as always, we insist that you should be very careful with your rights, especially property or real estate. Sometimes simple advice, received in time, saves valuable property and prevents litigation that can last for years.