The author is a Ukrainian advocate with over 15 years of legal experience and is an aspiring solicitor. We currently study English Law in preparation for the Solicitor Qualifying Examination (SQE). We find the subjects in the SQE prep program to be helpful in developing a comprehensive understanding of the English law in general. It also offers practical benefits in all areas of international legal work, not only that of solicitors. Some of these will be discussed in the context of Civil law-based work below.
Whether you’re LPC or not, our specialised resources are here to guide you every step of the way:
SQE1 Course for Foreign Candidates
UA SQE1 Study Group
Recent Developments in Legal Collaboration
In recent years, the legal landscape in the European region and England & Wales has undergone substantial modernisation, significantly expanding the opportunities for Ukrainian private entities and individuals. Two pivotal agreements have been accessed to by nations at far opposite ends of the region:
- “The One Hundred Year Partnership Agreement between Ukraine and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland”, which was signed on January 16, 2025. And
- “The Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters”, which became effective in Ukraine in 2023 and in the United Kingdom in July 2025.
The legal system of England and Wales in general, and English law specifically, are held in high regard within the Ukrainian legal profession. The above development has been met with enthusiasm and determination to strengthen the Ukrainian legal system. We, as legal professionals, increasingly recognise the need to adopt successful practices fostered by the English judiciary, despite potential challenges of navigating unfamiliar territories.
Key Benefits of English Law for Ukrainian Legal System
What is especially valued in Ukraine is the UK’s courts’ remarkable capability to deliver justice in complex and intricate situations that have never been subjected to legal scrutiny before. Though this does not mean the courts would derogate from fundamental principles shaped over the centuries. Neither does this create any irreconcilable conflict with written law.
By contrast, the role of the written law in Ukraine remains central and monopolistic. The functioning of Ukraine’s judiciary is left behind in its importance to the regulation of social relationships.
Despite practicing and applying the law in its daily work, courts in civil law jurisdictions are confined within the existing legal framework developed solely by the Parliament and the executive government. Ukraine relies heavily – if not entirely – on this input from legislators. Written laws stipulate when the parties’ rights arise and how they evolve and ultimately cease. However, this reliance can sometimes lead to absurd decisions that defy common sense, simply because there is no legal reference for addressing a particular situation.
Judicial Precedent
While some cases are being resolved by the Ukrainian judiciary through analogy and interpretation, such instances are extremely rare. Most judges are hesitant to take the risk of entering the murky waters of analogy and interpretation. Applying an existing legal concept to a new, unfamiliar subject in dispute is not generally appreciated, especially by first instance courts. This turns into a period of “silent uncertainty” when the courts tend somehow to avoid the case. They often do so by denying jurisdiction, i.e. referring the case from commercial to administrative and from administrative to civil division courts. They may thereby drag the case out for years until the legislative authority issues clear guidance on that particular subject.
Besides possible gaps in certain relationships regulation, the blind and complete reliance on the written law entails other problems in jurisprudence as well. It sometimes happens that the strict application of law to parties – even where it exists and comprehensively covers the relationships – may result in an overtly unjust judgment. This situation, in turn, erodes public trust and raises questions about the State’s ability to uphold justice and safeguard the legitimate interests of its citizens.
English Law of Equity and Trust
These issues were addressed by the English legal system centuries ago through the incorporation of the law of equity and trust (Equity). The concept of equity allows judgments to be based not solely on legislators’ input enshrined in codified laws but also on understanding what is just and fair in the circumstances. English law borrowed this from more ancient Roman law, which derives it from philosophers’ works.
One of the basic principles is expressed by the phrase “equitable is superior to just”. The phrase traces back to Aristotle in his work Nicomachean Ethics (Book V, Chapter 10).
Aristotle distinguished between:
- “Just” (dikaios) — what is strictly required by written law.
- “Equitable” (epieikes) — a correction of the law when its general wording would lead to unfairness in a specific case.
He explained that laws are written in general terms, but life produces exceptions. Therefore, equity steps in to temper the rigidity of the law, making outcomes more just than mere legal justice.
The Roman jurists adopted this idea, and later it entered English law through medieval scholastic philosophy and early Common Law writers. By the time the English Court of Chancery was active, legal commentators often echoed the sentiment – sometimes paraphrased as “Equity is superior to strict justice”—to justify equitable intervention over the Common Law.
The English legal system has further developed the Maxims of Equity. Some most known Maxims state that:
- Equity follows the law.
- Equity will not suffer a wrong to be without a remedy.
- Whoever comes to equity must have clean hands.
- Equity looks to intent, rather than form.
- Equity considers that which ought to be done, as done.
- Equity acts in personam.
- Equity does not assist a volunteer.
The Maxims should not be interpreted as rigid rules. They serve to summarise and provide essential guidance regarding the application of this legal framework. Still, they are open to potential evolution in response to the changing dynamics of civil and legal relationships. Equity prioritises what is deemed “conscionable” above any strict principles that may have been established. In this context, the court will intervene when an act or omission is perceived as being “against the conscience”.
Having such a helpful and flexible instrument in their hands, the judges are capable of delivering fair rulings even in situations where other courts remain “paralysed”.
Necessity of Qualified Practitioners
Implementing principles of Equity will require significant enhancement of professional qualifications among all relevant practitioners. Understanding these principles involves not only a profound knowledge of law, but also a critical personal perspective on what is morally acceptable and what is not.
At this point, the Ukrainian legal system possesses a solid pool of specialists capable of applying Equity after undergoing relevant preparation. To prevent pitiful mistakes in this area, the cases involving Equity law could be reserved for higher courts initially. However, it is essential that, over time, all courts and judges become proficient in this vital realm of natural justice.
As a final point, the Equity law is not the only benefit of the English legal system that we value and should adopt in Ukraine. Recognising the exceptional role of English judges, it’s essential to acknowledge that such achievement is not the product of courts operating in isolation. Instead, it originates from the diligent collaboration among a range of legal professionals. This includes those who represent the parties crafting sophisticated legal arguments, as well as those who draft new legislation and codify established principles.
Meticulous attention to the justice delivery process and the strict enforcement of professional ethics are aspects that the Ukrainian legal sector particularly aims to implement. Such an approach could change the negative perception of lawyers in the post-Soviet communist society. This is especially pertinent today, as the foundations of justice are being challenged by the unjust war led by the Russian Federation.
All of the discussed factors above motivate legal practitioners in Ukraine to enhance their expertise by embracing English law and pursuing qualification through the SQE route.
