Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Background: On 24 February, Russia launched a military attack on the entire territory of Ukraine, in connection with which the President of Ukraine declared martial law. According to the Law of Ukraine ‘On Martial Law’, martial law is a special legal regime introduced in the event of armed aggression, danger to the state independence of Ukraine, or its territorial integrity and arranges for the provision of appropriate state authorities, military command, military administrations, and local authorities self-governance of the powers necessary to avert the threat, repel armed aggression and ensure national security, and eliminate the threat of danger to the state independence of Ukraine, its territorial integrity, as well as the temporary restriction of the constitutional rights and freedoms of persons and citizens and the rights and legitimate interests of legal entities within the validity period of these restrictions. This study is designed to analyse the consequences of armed aggression against Ukraine and the introduction of the appropriate legal regime in such areas as the realisation of property rights, the administration of justice, the enforcement of court decisions, and labour relations. Methods: To achieve the goals of the research, general scientific and special methods of scientific research were applied, such as comparative-legal and semantic-structural methods and the method of grouping, analysis, synthesis, and generalization. Results and Conclusions: The introduction of the martial law regime throughout the territory of Ukraine affected all spheres of life and, as a result, requires adaptation to modern realities. In particular, this consists of changes to the current legislation because the martial law regime involves the restriction of certain constitutional rights and freedoms of persons and the introduction of new mechanisms – for example, the suspension of labour relations, changes in the jurisdiction of courts for the possibility of justice, expanding the competence of private executors, and even making changes to the regulations of ICAC due to the impossibility of sending documents by mail, as well as allowing process participants to personally participate in meetings.
Prytyka et al. (Sun,) studied this question.