Full Breakdown
Hungary’s Court Defeat Over EU Funding for Ukraine
9/10/2026, 2:03:35 PM
Court Ruling on EPF Funding
On 9 September 2024 the EU General Court dismissed Hungary’s lawsuit challenging the European Peace Facility’s (EPF) allocation of profits from frozen Russian central-bank assets to Ukraine’s defence forces. The ruling leaves the EPF decision in place and does not address the merits of Hungary’s claim that its exclusion from the vote was unlawful.
Legal Background of the European Peace Facility
The EPF, created by Council Decision 2021/509, finances lethal aid to Kyiv outside the ordinary EU budget. Between 2022 and 2024 the EPF mobilised €6.1 billion; a 2024 increase added €5 billion via a dedicated Ukraine Assistance Fund, bringing total EPF support to €11.1 billion. The financing relies on “extraordinary revenues” – profits generated by immobilised Russian assets, not the underlying reserves.
Hungary’s Challenge and Its Basis
Hungary objected to a 21 June 2024 EPF committee decision allocating the first instalment of these profits to Ukraine’s armed forces. It argued that, because it abstained from the related Council decision on 21 May 2024, it should have been excluded from voting only as a “non-contributor,” and that this breached Article 31(1) of the Treaty on European Union. On 30 August 2024 Hungary filed case T-457/24 seeking annulment of both the June 21 decision and the minutes of the 25 June meeting.
Court’s Reasoning
The General Court held that the EPF committee’s act falls within the CFSP, where treaty exceptions limit judicial review. Consequently, the court declined to assess whether the voting rules had been correctly applied.
Political Context and Policy Shift
Hungary’s former government under Viktor Orbán maintained close ties with Moscow and repeatedly blocked EU support for Kyiv. After the April 2026 parliamentary elections, the new administration under Prime Minister Péter Magyar re-oriented foreign policy, identifying Russia as a threat, expelling ten Russian diplomats, and calling for an end to the war in Ukraine. This shift underscores the broader significance of the court’s decision for Hungary’s evolving stance toward both Russia and Ukraine.
Ongoing Tensions Over Ukraine’s EU Accession
Separately, Hungary continues to impede Ukraine’s EU accession process. On 8 September 2024 the EU’s Working Party on Enlargement (COELA) failed to approve the screening results for negotiating clusters 2 and 3, a move attributed to Hungary’s demand for guarantees on the rights of the Hungarian minority in Transcarpathia.
Prime Minister Péter Magyar pointed to a recent “historic agreement” with Kyiv that secured educational, cultural, linguistic and political rights for the Transcarpathian Hungarian community.
Timeline
- 21 May 2024 – Council decisions adopted; Hungary records a constructive abstention.
- 21 June 2024 – EPF committee allocates first instalment of frozen-asset profits to Ukraine.
- 25 June 2024 – Minutes of the EPF committee meeting recorded.
- 30 August 2024 – Hungary files case T-457/24 with the General Court.
- 9 September 2024 – General Court dismisses the lawsuit on jurisdictional grounds.
- 8 September 2024 – COELA fails to approve Ukraine’s clusters 2 and 3 due to Hungary’s objection.
Data & Statistics
- €6.1 billion mobilised by the EPF for Ukraine (2022-2024).
- €5 billion added in 2024 via the Ukraine Assistance Fund, raising total EPF support to €11.1 billion.
- The contested allocation concerns profits from immobilised Russian assets, not the underlying central-bank reserves.
The court’s dismissal preserves the flow of these profits to Kyiv while leaving open the broader legal and political questions surrounding EU financing mechanisms and Hungary’s role in shaping Ukraine’s European integration.
