In a high-profile employment case (758/4178/22) that has garnered national attention, our firm successfully represented one of the top managers of the largest Ukrainian state-owned company in litigation concerning the unlawful suspension of an employment contract during martial law.

The dispute arose after the employer unilaterally issued an order to suspend the client’s employment contract, citing martial law and operational changes. Despite the ongoing hostilities, our client continued to carry out all professional responsibilities remotely. Nevertheless, the employer attempted to halt salary payments and benefits based on an alleged lack of work.

The courts at all three levels, including the Supreme Court, ruled in favor of our client, recognizing that:

•The employer failed to demonstrate an absolute impossibility of assigning work or the employee’s inability to perform it;

•The introduction of martial law does not automatically justify suspending employment relationships unless both parties are objectively prevented from fulfilling their duties;

•The contested order lacked proper justification and was thus declared unlawful.

As a result, the client was awarded compensation for the full period of forced absence (over UAH 16 million), calculated on the basis of average salary.

This ruling has been widely recognized as a landmark precedent in Ukrainian labor law, especially in the context of wartime employment regulation. It affirms that even under martial law, employees remain protected from arbitrary suspension, and employers must meet a high evidentiary threshold to justify such measures.

We are proud to have supported our client in achieving justice and to have contributed to the development of case law that reinforces labor rights even under extraordinary circumstances.