
Fionna Gavin Partner
UK lays framework for increased Russian sanctions in the event diplomacy fails
Under the UK sanctions on Russia, the Secretary of State can designate “involved persons” as subject to an asset freeze.
Previously, a person could be designated as an “involved person” where they are or were involved in destabilising Ukraine or undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty or independence of Ukraine.
The amendments provide that an “involved person” can now include a person who is or has been involved in obtaining a benefit from or supporting the Government of Russia. This can include:
The “Government of Russia” includes the Presidency, public bodies and agencies subordinate to the President, the Chairman of the Government, any Ministry of Russia and any other public body or agency of the Government and the Central Bank.
Government of Russia affiliated entities includes legal persons (i) owned or controlled directly by the Government, (ii) where the Government holds directly or indirectly a minority interest, (iii) which receives or has received financing directly or indirectly from the Russian Direct Investment Fund or National Wealth Fund or (iv) otherwise obtains a financial benefit or other material benefit from the Government.
Of particular note and of importance to those involved in international trade is the number of sectors listed as sectors of strategic significance to the Russian Government and for which a party can be designated by virtue of their involvement. These sectors include (a) chemicals, (b) construction, (c) defence, (d) electronics, (e) energy, (f) extractives, (g) financial services, (h) information, communications and digital technologies and (i) transport.
Whilst the UK has not yet designated a person under these amendments, the messaging in relation to potential future action if a resolution to current issues cannot be found is clear. Given the nature of sanctions and the fact that they can change with immediate effect, it would be prudent for any business that may be caught by these sanctions to consider and evaluate the risks they may be exposed to and try to mitigate those risks accordingly, for example by including appropriate contractual sanctions clauses.
06-02-2023 / Maritime
This bareboat charterparty dispute is noteworthy for the Court’s findings on the effect of international sanctions on the Charterers’ obligations to make payment and the Owners’ obligations to nominate a bank account into which payment could be made pursuant to the contractual purchase option.
06-02-2023 / Maritime
The Shipping E-Brief is a publication providing you with key information on legal decisions and developments in shipping and related business areas.
30-01-2023 / Maritime, Yachts & Superyachts
The Court recently considered the following question: “Where a charterparty clause provides that no deductions from hire (including for off-hire or alleged off-hire) may be made without the shipowner’s consent: is non-payment of hire a ‘deduction’ if the Vessel is off hire at the instalment date?”
23-01-2023 / Maritime
Court confirms applicable package limit when cargo interests have to pay salvage Trafigura Pte Ltd v. TKK Shipping Pte Ltd (Thor Lineage) [2023] EWHC 26 (Comm)
09-01-2023 / Maritime
We are delighted to share that Mohamed El Hawawy, Joint Managing Partner, and Natalie Jensen, Partner, from our Dubai office, have contributed the UAE chapter to the recently published Sixth Edition of the Third Party Litigation Funding Law Review.
19-12-2022 / Maritime
In a charterparty dispute, the Court has declined to grant an anti-enforcement injunction in respect of foreign proceedings because it found that there was no binding arbitration agreement between the parties. The decision also highlights that delay can be a bar to the grant of an anti-suit injunction. Read Peter McNamee and Reema Shour’s article for an analysis of the Court’s conclusions.