The court has divided the assets of Petro and Maryna Poroshenko after a fourth attempt
What the court ruled
Marina Poroshenko, wife of Ukraine’s fifth president, Petro Poroshenko, has won her appeal in a case concerning the division of property held by the couple under the right of joint ownership.
This is stated in the ruling of the Vinnytsia Court of Appeal. The Vinnytsia Court of Appeal upheld the appeal lodged by the claimant’s representative, lawyer Kristina Misenko, against the decision of the Kryzhopil District Court of Vinnytsia Oblast in the case concerning the division of the couple’s property.
What each party received
The court recognised Marina Poroshenko’s right to personal private ownership of 8,190 shares in PJSC ZNKIF “Prime Assets Capital”, which, according to the book value of assets for the last reporting period, are worth 8.34 million hryvnias.
The ruling also covers property totalling 8,534,330,774 hryvnias and 56 kopecks.
The court recognised Petro Poroshenko’s right to personal private ownership of a Honda CMX 1100D motorcycle, a KING TRAILERS semi-trailer, a Volvo S90 2.0 T8 INSCRIPTION car and other property.
He was also recognised as having a right to the accrued but unpaid portion of the profits of the legal entity without legal personality Sequent (Switzerland) AG, formerly known as Rothschild Trust (Switzerland) AG, amounting to 20,000,000 US dollars, which, according to the exchange rate of the National Bank of Ukraine as at 25 March 2025, amounts to 832,892,000 hryvnias, as well as cash in the amount of 3,190,905,107.30 hryvnias.
In total, the assets are valued at 8,553,712,672 hryvnias 30 kopecks.
The ruling of the court of appeal comes into force on the day of its adoption and may be appealed to the Supreme Court within thirty days of its pronouncement.
Why the Poroshenkos are dividing their property
In February, the Kryzhopil District Court of Vinnytsia Oblast rejected Maryna Poroshenko’s claim against Petro Poroshenko regarding the division of the couple’s property for the third time in the past year.
The main subject of the dispute was the controlling stake in the investment fund ‘Prime Assets Capital’. This involves 8,190 shares, representing almost 79 per cent of the fund’s authorised capital. The value of this asset is estimated at over 8.33 billion hryvnias.
In addition to corporate rights, the claim also concerned cash savings in bank accounts. Marina Poroshenko claimed a share of funds held at the “International Investment Bank” and “RVS Bank”. The total amount of bank assets subject to division exceeds several million hryvnias and millions of euros in cash.
Marina Poroshenko first applied to the court in March 2025 requesting the division of the couple’s property. The value of the claim at that time was 17 billion hryvnias.
Petro Poroshenko’s lawyer, Ihor Holovan, stated in April that this claim does not imply a divorce. “Divorce is a separate process, and property proceedings are separate processes,” he said.
As a reminder: Petro Poroshenko, leader of the European Solidarity party, has been charged with high treason and aiding terrorism as part of an investigation into the supply of coal from the occupied territories.
On 12 February 2025, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy enacted a decision of the National Security and Defence Council, under which indefinite sanctions were imposed on Petro Poroshenko. The National Securities Commission did not extend the operating licence for 20 years of PJSC “Prime Assets Capital Closed-End Undiversified Investment Fund”, where Petro Poroshenko’s assets are concentrated, due to the sanctions imposed against him by the NSDC.
These sanctions include, in particular, the freezing of assets, restrictions on trading operations, the cessation of the transit of resources and transport through Ukrainian territory, a ban on the transfer of capital abroad, as well as the revocation of state awards and other forms of official recognition.
Marina Poroshenko filed a lawsuit seeking the division of joint property. On 16 May, the Kryzhopil District Court of Vinnytsia Oblast closed the proceedings, noting the absence of a subject matter of dispute.
