What is property seizure and why is it imposed?

Seizure in criminal proceedings

According to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (hereinafter referred to as the CPC of Ukraine), property seizure is one of the measures to secure criminal proceedings, applied with the aim of achieving the effectiveness of such proceedings. In the event of seizure, a person is temporarily deprived of the right to alienate, dispose of, or use the property if there is suspicion that it is evidence of a criminal offense or is subject to special confiscation, confiscation from a legal entity, to secure a claim, or to recover illicitly obtained benefits from a legal entity, or possible confiscation.

The main task of such a seizure is to prevent the possibility of damage, alienation, concealment, spoilage, or destruction of property. In addition, it should be noted that the corresponding security measure can only be imposed on the basis of a ruling by an investigating judge or a court.

It is equally important to emphasize that seizure is imposed on cash or non-cash funds, including money and valuables, securities, corporate or property rights, virtual assets, debit operations, and movable or immovable property. Moreover, a seizure can only be imposed if the necessity of such a security measure for the specified property is determined in a ruling or decision of an investigating judge or court.

To apply property seizure, a prosecutor, or an investigator with the prosecutor’s approval, applies to the investigating judge or court with a motion. The motion for property seizure must meet the requirements established by the CPC of Ukraine. Otherwise, the investigating judge or court returns the relevant motion, and if the shortcomings are not eliminated, outright denies its satisfaction.

Therefore, as follows from the above, property seizure in criminal proceedings is applied only for a specific purpose, by the decision of authorized subjects, and with proper justification.

Seizure to secure a claim As mentioned above, one of the grounds for applying property seizure is securing a civil claim in criminal proceedings. A person who has suffered property and/or moral damage caused by a criminal offense may file such a claim against a suspect or accused during the criminal proceedings, prior to the start of the trial.

The subjects filing a motion for property seizure to secure a civil claim may be a prosecutor, an investigator with the prosecutor’s approval, or a civil plaintiff (the person who suffered damages and is filing the civil claim).

Moreover, the property of a suspect, accused, or convicted person is seized only if there is a justified amount of the civil claim. The motion must necessarily state:

1. The amount of damage caused to the person by the criminal offense, as well as the amount of the claim demands.
2. Evidence of the fact that damage was caused and the amount of such damage.

Furthermore, the value of the property subject to seizure must be proportionate to the amount of damage caused by the criminal offense.

Grounds for Cancelling Property Seizure

Absence of suspicion

As noted in the previous section, property seizure in criminal proceedings can be imposed only for a specific purpose, and importantly, only on certain subjects. According to the CPC of Ukraine, property seizure is allowed for the purpose of ensuring: the preservation of physical evidence, special confiscation, confiscation of property, compensation for damage caused to a person by a criminal offense (civil claim), or recovery of illicitly obtained benefits from a legal entity.

In all the above cases, except for ensuring the preservation of physical evidence, the seizure is imposed, in particular, on a suspect, accused, or convicted person.

Thus, only for the purpose of preserving physical evidence can a seizure be applied to the property of any natural or legal person, provided there are sufficient grounds. However, the imposition of a seizure on a person’s property for the purpose of ensuring special confiscation, confiscation of property, compensation for damage caused to a person by a criminal offense (civil claim), or recovery of illicitly obtained benefits from a legal entity can occur only after such a person acquires the status of a suspect (i.e., they must be served with a notice of suspicion).

Therefore, in the absence of the specified notice and the imposition of a seizure on a person’s property, such a seizure must be cancelled.

Insufficient evidence According to the CPC of Ukraine, the person filing a motion for the seizure of property of a suspect, accused, convicted person, and other persons must indicate the grounds and purpose of such seizure, the corresponding justification for its necessity, as well as the presence of risks defined by the code. In addition, documents confirming the right of ownership to the property, or specific facts and evidence indicating the possession, use, or disposal of such property by the person, must be included.

We outlined the purpose of imposing a seizure in the previous subsection, so next we will consider the grounds and existing risks that an investigator, prosecutor, or civil plaintiff must justify in their motion. In the case of applying seizure to ensure:

1. Preservation of physical evidence: seizure is imposed on property if there is a combination of grounds to believe that such property meets the criteria of being physical evidence.
2. Special confiscation: seizure is imposed on property if there is a combination of grounds to believe it will be subject to special confiscation in certain cases provided for by the Criminal Code of Ukraine.
3. Confiscation of property: seizure is imposed on property if there is a combination of grounds to believe that the court may impose a punishment in the form of confiscation of property or apply a criminal-law measure to a legal entity in the form of confiscation of property.
4. Compensation for damage caused as a result of a criminal offense, or recovery of illicitly obtained benefits from a legal entity: seizure is imposed if there is a justified amount of the civil claim, as well as a justified amount of illicit benefit received by the legal entity against which the proceedings are being conducted.

The corresponding risks that the property seizure is meant to prevent are the possibility of damage, alienation, concealment, spoilage, or destruction of such property.

Thus, the subject submitting the specified motion must mandatory provide proper justification supporting one of the grounds, as well as the presence of a corresponding risk that could hinder the objectives of the property seizure. In case of non-compliance with these requirements, the seizure may be cancelled.

Seizure imposed with violations The order and procedure for imposing a seizure on a person’s property are strictly regulated by the CPC of Ukraine. Specific requirements apply to the content and deadlines for submitting a motion for property seizure, as well as its consideration. Below we will look at the main rules, the violation of which can lead to the cancellation of the property seizure.

Only a prosecutor, an investigator with the latter’s approval, and, in the case of securing a civil claim, also a civil plaintiff, have the right to apply to a court or an investigating judge with the aforementioned motion.

The motion must include: grounds, purpose, and justification of the necessity for seizure; a list and types of property to be seized; documents confirming property ownership, or specific facts and evidence indicating possession, use, or disposal of such property by the person; the amount of damage or illicit benefit received by a legal entity.

If the motion is filed by a civil plaintiff, it is necessary to specify the amount of damage caused by the criminal offense, the size of the claim demands, and evidence of the fact of causing damage and its amount.

Also, the CPC of Ukraine defines several cases when it is prohibited to seize accounts. For example, it is prohibited to seize funds located in the National Bank of Ukraine or another bank on accounts opened for the Central Securities Depository and/or clearing institutions to ensure the execution of cash settlements.

Furthermore, the investigating judge or court must apply the least burdensome method of seizure. It is prohibited to impose a seizure that could lead to the suspension or excessive restriction of a person’s lawful entrepreneurial activity, or other negative consequences.

The ruling satisfying the motion must contain: a list of the property subject to seizure; grounds for applying the seizure; if a decision is made to return temporarily seized property, its list; an indication of the property subject to a ban or restriction on disposal and use, if provided for; the procedure for executing the ruling.

Therefore, in the event of a violation of the norms regulating the application of the preventive measure in question, the property seizure must be cancelled.

How to File an Application to Cancel Property Seizure?

Required documents According to Article 174 of the CPC of Ukraine, a person has the right to file a motion to cancel a property seizure entirely or partially. In order to properly justify your position, you should attach specifically those documents that support your arguments to the application for the cancellation of property seizure. In addition, you should attach copies of documents identifying you, as well as a copy of the ruling based on which the seizure was imposed.

For example, if a person has compensated for the damage caused by a criminal offense, then the need to apply property seizure accordingly disappears. In such a case, a document confirming such compensation should be provided. Or, if the previously notified suspicion of a criminal offense was changed for a person, a copy of such a decision should be provided, etc.

Requirements for the application In addition to the general requirements for the content of any application or motion (name of the person filing the motion, their place of residence and taxpayer registration number, name of the court to which the motion is submitted, case or criminal proceeding number, and the judge’s surname and initials, the essence of the issue to be considered, as well as a list of documents attached to the motion), the CPC of Ukraine establishes specific provisions governing the content of a motion to cancel a property seizure.

First, it is worth noting that only a suspect, accused, their defense counsel or legal representative, another owner or possessor of the property, or a representative of the legal entity against which proceedings are being conducted, can apply with the aforementioned motion.

Second, the specified subjects must argue that the need for the further application of property seizure has disappeared, or that such seizure was imposed unjustifiably.

Thus, if a person believes that the further need to apply the seizure is absent, it is necessary to indicate exactly what gave rise to this opinion and prove their position. When speaking of an unjustifiably imposed property seizure as grounds for its cancellation, one should point out specific gaps in the justification of such a seizure at the time of its imposition.

Therefore, for an investigating judge or court to make a decision to satisfy a motion to cancel a property seizure, one must strictly adhere to the requirements set for the aforementioned motion; otherwise, a negative decision may be received. (P.S. Typical grounds for satisfying the specified motion will be given in the next section).

Consideration periods A motion to cancel a property seizure must be considered no later than three days after its receipt by the court. The person who filed the motion and the person upon whose motion the seizure was imposed must be notified of the time and place of the consideration.

In practice, however, the specified period is not always adhered to. Due to the workload and lack of interest of the courts, a motion to cancel a seizure may be considered after a month, or possibly even several months.

Cancellation of Seizure During Pre-trial Investigation

When does an investigating judge consider it? In the previous section, we noted that a motion to cancel a property seizure is considered by a court or an investigating judge. The corresponding question arises: to whom should one apply with the specified motion?

The answer is contained within the CPC of Ukraine itself, which states that during a pre-trial investigation, an application to cancel a property seizure is considered by an investigating judge, and during trial proceedings, by a court accordingly.

Thus, as long as the pre-trial investigation is not completed (i.e., the prosecutor has not yet submitted an indictment against the person to the court), the ruling to satisfy or deny the motion to cancel the property seizure is made by an investigating judge.

Typical grounds for satisfying applications As noted in the previous section, the subjects submitting the considered motion must prove that the need for the further application of property seizure has disappeared or that such seizure was imposed unjustifiably. Thus, the satisfaction of a motion to cancel a seizure occurs only on one of the specified grounds, each of which we will specify further.

The need to impose a seizure may disappear if:

1. New circumstances have emerged that were not known at the time the seizure was imposed;
2. The previously notified suspicion of a criminal offense has been changed;
3. The person has compensated for the damage caused, which is exacted under a civil claim, etc.

Property seizure is unjustified if:

1. Interference with a person’s property right is disproportionate according to ECHR (European Court of Human Rights) practice;
2. The norms of the CPC of Ukraine regulating the application of property seizure are violated;
3. The risks that the property seizure is meant to prevent are absent;
4. There are no grounds for imposing a seizure;
5. The specified property is of no significance to the criminal proceeding, etc.

Consequently, it should be summarized that quite a few cases can serve as grounds for satisfying the motion, and correspondingly, for cancelling the property seizure.

Challenging an Illegal Seizure

Appeal complaint and court practice Filing a motion to cancel a property seizure is not the only option for defending a person’s rights. Apart from submitting the specified motion, the seizure can also be challenged in an appellate court, but with certain specificities.

The deadline for submitting an appeal complaint to challenge a property seizure is 5 days from the moment of its announcement.

After analyzing the norms of the CPC of Ukraine, as well as the relevant court practice, it should be pointed out that a court ruling on property seizure or refusal thereof, rendered during trial proceedings in the court of first instance before the adoption of certain court decisions, is not subject to a separate appellate challenge. This position was supported by the Joint Chamber of the Criminal Cassation Court of the Supreme Court in its resolution dated October 24, 2024, in case No. 456/3303/21.

Thus, in accordance with the above, during trial proceedings, an appeal against a ruling on property seizure or refusal thereof is possible only together with the verdict in the case.

The situation is different regarding the challenge of an investigating judge’s ruling on property seizure or refusal thereof, rendered during a pre-trial investigation. The provisions of Clause 9, Part 1, Article 309 of the CPC of Ukraine expressly allow challenging the ruling in question through an appellate procedure. At the same time, the issue of the possibility of an appellate challenge of an investigating judge’s ruling on the cancellation of property seizure or refusal of such cancellation remains debatable.

In a ruling dated January 23, 2024, in case No. 569/19829/21, the Criminal Cassation Court within the Supreme Court noted that despite the fact that appealing rulings on the cancellation of property seizure or refusal of such cancellation is not directly provided for by Clause 9, Part 1, Article 309 of the CPC of Ukraine, this does not mean the legislator established a ban on the appeal in question. Given that an investigating judge’s ruling on cancelling a property seizure or refusing such cancellation leads to similar legal consequences as a ruling on property seizure or refusal of property seizure, the court emphasized that the cited provision of the CPC of Ukraine provides for the appellate challenge of such rulings as well.

However, in the resolution of the Joint Chamber of the Criminal Cassation Court within the Supreme Court dated May 20, 2024, in case No. 712/191/23, and the resolution of the Third Judicial Chamber of the Criminal Cassation Court within the Supreme Court dated December 03, 2025, in case 205/8372/15, the opposite position is presented. Courts come to the conclusion that an investigating judge’s ruling on the cancellation of property seizure or refusal of such cancellation is not subject to appellate challenge, because the possibility of such an appeal is not directly provided for by the CPC of Ukraine.

When is a Lawyer’s Help Needed?

Complex cases In some situations, the procedure for cancelling or appealing a property seizure in criminal proceedings is legally complex and requires qualified expert assistance. Such cases are not typical, which means an action plan must be developed down to the smallest detail.

One of the most common complex situations is the seizure of property belonging to a person who is not a suspect, accused, or convicted. In such a case, the seizure is imposed on property recognized as physical evidence. Here, it is crucial to properly substantiate the property owner’s position and prove the absence of a connection to the criminal proceeding.

Cases where a seizure is imposed on corporate rights, bank accounts, or enterprise property are also complex. Such restrictions can effectively paralyze a business’s operations, and the procedure for appealing them often requires a detailed analysis of the investigating judge’s ruling, the materials of the criminal proceedings, and the correct application of the norms of criminal procedural legislation.

Situations where property is seized to ensure confiscation present a separate difficulty, as there is a risk of losing the property forever. In such cases, a lawyer helps formulate a legal position proving the absence of grounds for restricting the property right.

How does a lawyer speed up the lifting of the seizure? Sometimes the procedure for lifting a property seizure can drag on for a very long time due to the workload and lack of interest of the courts. A professional lawyer can significantly speed up the procedure for cancelling a property seizure through the right procedural tactics and experience working with criminal proceedings.

First of all, the lawyer conducts a detailed analysis of the property seizure ruling and checks whether the requirements of criminal procedural legislation were met during its issuance. Often, a seizure is imposed in violation of the procedure or without sufficient justification. In such cases, a well-prepared motion to cancel the seizure can significantly increase the chances of a positive court decision.

In addition, to lift a property seizure, a lawyer collects and submits the necessary evidence to the court: documents confirming ownership rights, the legality of the property’s origin, and the absence of risks of its concealment or alienation. A properly prepared package of evidence allows the court to consider the issue faster and make a decision to lift the seizure.

Another important factor is proper communication with the court and the prosecution. An experienced lawyer knows which procedural tools to use – filing motions, appeals, or additional explanations. This helps avoid dragging out the process and effectively protects the owner’s right to the property.