Abstract: The study examines the legal consequences related to the termination of private property rights of individuals associated with unfriendly countries in the Republic of Crimea. In the context of sanctions and the special military operation in Ukraine, the nationalization of assets belonging to individuals and legal entities linked to unfriendly countries has become a pressing issue. The author analyzes the legal nature of the forced termination of property rights, using the term "nationalization" for clarity. The focus is on the fate of encumbrances, such as leases and mortgages, that may have been imposed on the property before it was transferred to the ownership of the Republic of Crimea. Using recent legislative changes in Crimea as a basis, the author explores potential legal conflicts and gaps in the regulation of encumbrances after the termination of property rights. The research methodology is based on a comparative legal analysis of federal and Crimean legislation, applying the analogy of law and analogy of rights to fill legal gaps. The novelty of the study lies in its examination of the legal nature of property rights termination within the context of Crimean and Russian legislation. Unlike traditional forms of nationalization and requisition, the regulatory framework discussed does not fully align with federal laws, necessitating the application of legal analogy. The author concludes that encumbrances imposed before nationalization may be preserved if they do not contradict the goals of the nationalization. The main conclusion is that the current legal uncertainty should be addressed through legislative changes, ensuring a balance between private and public interests, and preserving encumbrances only when they do not threaten state security.