In a decisive legal development, the Court of Appeal of England and Wales has formally dismissed the appeal mounted by former owners of PrivatBank, Ihor Kolomoisky and Hennadiy Boholiubov, thereby upholding a significant financial judgment rendered earlier this year. The ruling confirms the July 2025 High Court decision that mandates the two individuals to remit over $3 billion to the Ukrainian financial institution, marking a substantial victory for the bank in its long-standing dispute over asset seizure and corporate control.
The legal battle centers on the 2016 nationalization of PrivatBank by Ukraine’s National Bank, which remains the country’s largest financial institution. Kolomoisky, a prominent Ukrainian industrialist and former parliamentarian, and Boholiubov, a veteran banking executive and former chairman of the bank’s board, previously held majority stakes prior to the regulatory intervention. Following the state takeover, the former owners initiated a series of international lawsuits seeking to overturn the nationalization and pursue substantial compensation, with London serving as the primary venue for several key proceedings.
PrivatBank, which operates under the strict oversight of the Ukrainian state and the National Bank of Ukraine, has consistently maintained that the assets in question were misappropriated during the tenure of the former owners. The bank’s recent corporate communications highlight the significance of the appellate court’s rejection, noting that the upheld judgment addresses longstanding grievances regarding corporate governance and the recovery of frozen capital. Legal analysts view this development as a critical step in resolving prolonged cross-border litigation between Ukrainian financial entities and wealthy shareholders.
The financial implications of the ruling extend beyond the immediate settlement figure. For PrivatBank, which underwent extensive restructuring since its nationalization, the recovered funds may facilitate further capitalization efforts, support regulatory compliance targets, and strengthen its position within Ukraine’s broader banking sector. Meanwhile, the enforcement mechanisms for the $3 billion judgment remain a focal point for financial regulators on both sides of the Atlantic, as international asset recovery cases frequently navigate complex jurisdictional frameworks.