Notice: We are currently performing maintenance to improve the italaw platform. The site remains fully accessible. Thank you for your patience.

Volga-Dnepr Airlines v. Canada, Judgment and Reasons of the Federal Court of Canada, August 11, 2026

11 Aug 2026
Volga-Dnepr Airlines LLC v. Canada, PCA Case No. 2025-09
View case details
Judgment and Reasons of the Federal Court of Canada
Document Details:
LISTED PARTICIPANTS
Judgment and Reasons of the Federal Court of Canada
Participants listed are for this document only and may not include all participants involved in the entire case. Always consult the original documents.
Claimant appointee
Respondent appointee
Tribunal/Panel chair
Arbitrator(s)
Sole Arbitrator
ICSID Annulment Committee president
ICSID Annulment Committee members
WTO Appellate Body members
WTO Appellate Body chair
Judges
Ann Marie McDonald
Claimant's counsel
Vincent DeRose, Jennifer Radford, Michelle Folinas
Claimant's law firm
Respondent's counsel
Marilyn Venney, Margaret Cormack
Respondent's law firm
Other counsel
Claimant's expert
Claimant's expert firm
Respondent's expert
Respondent's expert firm
Claimant's witness
Respondent's witness
Other witnesses
Tribunal secretary
Tribunal assistant
Third-party funder
Entities
Tereposky & DeRose, Volga-Dnepr Airlines LLC, Canada
Country
Canada
Print reporter
Document Summary
Judgment and Reasons of the Federal Court of Canada
This summary note is machine-generated. Always consult the original materials.

Procedural Posture

The Federal Court of Canada issued a Judgment and Reasons dismissing an application for judicial review filed by Volga-Dnepr Airlines LLC (VDA). VDA sought to overturn the Minister of Foreign Affairs' decision refusing to lift sanctions imposed on the airline pursuant to the Special Economic Measures (Russia) Regulations.

Principal Legal Issues

The core issues before the Court were whether the Minister's refusal to delist VDA was procedurally unfair and whether the decision was substantively unreasonable. VDA contended that the Minister breached procedural fairness by failing to consider the entirety of its delisting application, specifically omitting numerous supporting documents from the Certified Tribunal Record (CTR), and by relying on undisclosed open-source information. Substantively, VDA argued that its inclusion on the sanctions list was ultra vires and violated international law, asserting it did not provide military services or funding related to the Ukraine conflict.

Court's Analysis and Findings

Applying a correctness-like standard to procedural fairness and a reasonableness standard to the merits, the Court found no basis to intervene. The Court determined that the Minister owed only a low degree of procedural fairness in the context of sanctions delisting. The omission of certain documents from the CTR did not constitute a breach, as the material information was adequately summarized in a Memorandum for Action prepared by Global Affairs Canada. Furthermore, the Court held that the Minister provided sufficient notice of the case to meet by disclosing the primary open-source articles relied upon, which detailed VDA's receipt of Russian government subsidies and contracts intended to circumvent Western sanctions.

Regarding reasonableness, the Court emphasized the wide deference afforded to the Minister's decisions at the apex of Canadian foreign policy. The Court found the Minister's conclusion—that VDA indirectly facilitated or supported the violation of Ukraine's sovereignty by assisting the Russian government in restoring supply chains—to be internally coherent and justified. VDA's arguments concerning its lack of direct military involvement or political influence were deemed irrelevant to the specific grounds of the Minister's decision.

Decision

The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review in its entirety. The Court awarded costs in the all-inclusive amount of $6,000.00 to the Respondent.