Menu
Regulatory and compliance checklist how do your internal policies fare

News / / Beijing, Regulatory and compliance checklist how do your internal policies fare, Regulatory and compliance checklist how do your internal policies fare, Dubai, Hamburg, Hong Kong, Regulatory and compliance checklist how do your internal policies fare, Regulatory and compliance checklist how do your internal policies fare, Regulatory and compliance checklist how do your internal policies fare, Regulatory and compliance checklist how do your internal policies fare, Piraeus, Shanghai, Singapore

Typically, any robust regulatory and compliance policy shouldgtnbspnbspStart with an assessment of the risks specific to your businessgtnbspnbspBe designed to address those specific risksgtnbspnbspBe embedded in the culture of the company from the board room downgtnbspnbspBe employed in relation to third party suppliers andgtnbspnbspBe reviewed periodically and amended to take into account new business risks, developments and any gaps found in the operation of the policy Some key areasBelow we outline some of the key current regulatory and compliance risks that your internal policies should be addressing1nbspnbspBribery, corruption and anti-money launderingRequests for facilitation payments from customs officials are nothing new, but the international prohibition of such payments is growing, with substantial fines imposed on companies in breach Key questions-nbspHow does your anti-bribery and corruption policy deal with facilitation payments-nbspWhat advice does it provide as to how a request for payment should be dealt with-nbspHave you checked the anti-bribery policy of your agents 2nbspnbspCyber-security, digitalisation and data protectionInternational freight transport is becoming ever more digitalised Whilst this can provide significant benefits and cost-savings, it also opens up a whole new front of risks In June 2017, AP-Moller Maersk became the latest high profile victim of a ransomware attack Since then, the transportation industry has received further guidance from organisations such as the IMO and, most recently, the UK Department of Transport, on implementing a cyber-security system and protocolsKey questions-nbspnbspWhat, if any, cyber-security and data protection policy and protocols do you have in place-nbspnbspWhen were these last reviewed-nbspnbspHave you tested your systems for vulnerabilities-nbspnbspHave you confirmed that your insurance policies cover data loss or breach3nbspnbspAnti-trustThe majority of developed countries have implemented stringent laws regulating and sanctioning behaviour that is deemed anti-competitivenbsp Authorities have shown a low tolerance approach to breaches as has been demonstrated in the multiple investigations relating to cartels in the freight and logistics markets Key questions-nbspIs your company a member of a trade association -nbspAt trade association meetings, are topics such as pricing, timing of changes to pricing policies or costs and profits discussed -nbspDo you have any formal or informal agreements in place with your competitors 4nbspnbspSanctions and other importexport controlsIn the current political landscape of nationalist policies, logistics companies need to be prepared for and alert to sudden changes in the trade regulation environment These include sanctions against specific goods, countries, entities and individuals trade defence measures such as import bans or quotas and restrictions on points of entryKey questions-nbspWhat procedures are in place for performing due diligence on new customers transactionscountries of import and export-nbspDo your standard terms and conditions include a sanctions clauseSummaryRegulatory oversight is increasing and here to stay Implementing appropriate compliance procedures and protocols to address just the four areas listed above is a significant undertaking for any business This is so even before consideration of the extent to which other regulatory legislation' may impact upon your business and impose additional obligations We have in mind the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation and Network and Information Security Directive, the UK's Criminal Finances Act, international Ballast Water Management obligations and the new cyber-security and data protection laws in China, to name but a fewConducting a regulatory and compliance health-check to identify what, if any, gaps there may be in your company's compliance framework and how they might be addressed ought to be a topic discussed in all corporate boardrooms in the coming monthsIf you have any questions relating to the above or need help in assessing the robustness of your current policies, please contact Ince Co's dedicated Regulatory and Compliance team Rory Macfarlane or your usual Ince Co contact

Related sectors:

Related services:

Related news & insights

News / Court finds extra-contractual counterclaims fell within scope of arbitration agreement

02-08-2022 / Maritime

Sea Master Special Maritime Enterprise & another v. Arab Bank (Switzerland) Ltd (Sea Master) [2022] EWHC 1953 (Comm) This bill of lading dispute raised issues as to whether the Bank financing the purchase of a cargo, and the holder of a switch bill of lading for the cargo, was a party to the arbitration agreement incorporated into the switch bill and, if so, whether certain counterclaims brought by the Owners came within the scope of that arbitration agreement. The Court agreed with the tribunal’s findings that, once the Court had decided that the Bank was a party to the arbitration agreement, then the counterclaims for reasonable remuneration and quantum meruit came within the ambit of the arbitration agreement, being claims “arising out of or in connection” with the bill of lading contract.

Court finds extra-contractual counterclaims fell within scope of arbitration agreement

News / Party offered reasonably satisfactory security following collision obliged to accept it

20-07-2022 / Maritime

MV Pacific Pearl Co Ltd v. Osios David Shipping Inc (Panamax Alexander) [2022] EWCA Civ 798 The Court of Appeal has confirmed that a party to ASG 2, the standard form Collision Jurisdiction Agreement, is obliged to accept reasonable security once it is offered and cannot choose to refuse that security and seek alternative or better security by arresting a ship. In such circumstances, there is no right to an arrest or any justification for it.

Party offered reasonably satisfactory security following collision obliged to accept it

News / Rosita Lau, MH calls for China businesses to opt for Hong Kong arbitration in their contracts

15-07-2022 / Maritime

In an interview published this morning (14 July) in The Hong Kong Maritime Hub, Ince Partner Rosita Lau, MH calls for Chinese businesses to opt for Hong Kong arbitration in their contracts, initiative that requires attention of officials from the highest level.

Rosita Lau, MH calls for China businesses to opt for Hong Kong arbitration in their contracts

News / Court finds Covid-19 restrictions did not constitute force majeure under MOA

13-07-2022 / Maritime

NKD Maritime Limited v. Bart Maritime (No 2) Inc (Shagang Giant) [2022] EWHC 1615 (Comm) The Court has construed a force majeure clause and considered whether Buyers validly terminated a contract for the sale of a vessel on the basis that Covid-19 lockdown restrictions prevented Sellers from transferring title in the Vessel. 

Court finds Covid-19 restrictions did not constitute force majeure under MOA

News / Shipping gets smart

20-06-2022 / Maritime

On 25 November 2021, the UK Law Commission published its Advice to the UK Government on how English law currently applies to smart legal contracts. Subsequently, on 16 March 2022, the Law Commission published its report on electronic trade documents, together with draft legislation that would implement its recommendations to allow for the legal recognition of trade documents such as bills of lading and bills of exchange in electronic form.

Shipping gets smart

News / Carrier Under CMR Successful in Limiting Liability for Consignee’s Losses

14-06-2022 / Maritime

Paul Knapfield v. C.A.R.S. Ltd & others [2022] EWHC 1437 (Comm) Disputes under the Carriage of Goods by Road Act 1965, which incorporates the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road 1956 (CMR), do not come up very often. This decision is, therefore, useful in illustrating when and how the CMR applies. In this case, the Court found that the CMR limit of liability applied to the claimant’s claim, with the result that his losses far exceeded the amount he could ultimately recover from the carrier.

Carrier Under CMR Successful in Limiting Liability for Consignee’s Losses