Dana Astra IOOO (a company registered in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Belarus) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Developmental Affairs (Respondent)

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2026/0054

Parties

Appellant(s)

Dana Astra IOOO

Respondent(s)

Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Developmental Affairs

Issue

Does the designation of an overseas entity as subject to financial sanctions bring the entity “within the jurisdiction” of the United Kingdom under Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the “ECHR”) such that the Human Rights Act 1998 (the “HRA”) is engaged notwithstanding that the entity has no assets or business in the United Kingdom?

Facts

The appellant, Dana Astra IOOO (“DANA”), is a company registered and operating in Belarus in the construction sector. DANA is one of the biggest developers in Belarus with its principal undertaking being a development covering three million square metres in central Minsk. DANA was awarded the development rights for this on 30 September 2014 by President Lukashenko, following a tender process. In June 2019, DANA entered into a four-year sponsorship with the Belarusian National Olympic Committee (“BNOC”) paying $2 million for such rights. President Lukashenko was president of the BNOC throughout the term. Following the disputed Belarusian presidential election on 9 August 2020, the International Olympic Committee imposed provisional measures on the BNOC after peaceful protests by Belarusian athletes concerning the election were suppressed by Belarus. DANA subsequently terminated the sponsorship agreement with the BNOC. At all times, DANA has held no property or assets, nor conducted any business, in the United Kingdom. In December 2020, DANA was designated (the “Designation”) by the respondent, the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, as an entity subject to financial sanctions relying on the Republic of Belarus (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (the “2019 Regulations”). The Secretary of State’s case for the Designation was that there were reasonable grounds to suspect that DANA had been involved in the repression of civil society or democratic opposition in Belarus, namely as sponsor of the BNOC, and had been involved in obtaining a benefit from or supporting the Government of Belarus through carrying on its business in the Belarusian construction sector. Since July 2022, DANA has also been the subject of restrictive measures imposed by the Government of Belarus due to the ultimate shareholder of DANA being registered in Cyprus, a state considered by the Government of Belarus to be unfriendly to the Belarusian regime. Such measures have been considered to have caused severe consequences for DANA. In May 2024, DANA filed an application under section 38(2) of the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 to set aside the Designation. The High Court reviewed this application and rejected DANA’s arguments based on the applicability of the ECHR, proportionality challenges (if the ECHR was applicable), and the (ir)rationality of the Designation. DANA appealed to the Court of Appeal who dismissed the appeal. DANA now appeals to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.

Date of issue

29 April 2026

Case origin

PTA

Back to top