Navigating the waters: Compliance with multiple regimes
By Kim Walsh and Olivia Bungay
Compliance with Russian sanctions goes beyond complying with Canada’s Russia Regulations. Canadian individuals and businesses may be unaware of several other sanctions regimes that apply to them.
In conjunction with its sanctions against Russia, the Canadian Government has placed sanctions against Belarus (Special Economic Measures (Belarus) Regulations) and Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine (Special Economic Measures (Ukraine) Regulations). Similar to the Russia Regulations, the Belarus and Ukraine Regulations list several designated persons and prohibit any person or business in Canada, or any Canadian citizen or business outside of Canada to:
- Deal in property, wherever situated, that is owned, held or controlled by designated persons or a person acting on behalf of a designated person;
- Enter into or facilitate a transaction related to a prohibited dealing;
- Provide any financial or related services in respect of a prohibited dealing;
- Provide any goods or financial services to a designated person.
Together, the Russia, Belarus and Ukraine Regulations currently list over 2100 designated persons. Aside from prohibiting dealings with designated persons, the Russia, Belarus and Ukraine Regulations prohibit the import and export of certain goods and the provision of certain services in relation to the sanctioned areas. Care must be taken to ensure compliance will all of Canada’s sanctions that target Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Aside from Canada’s sanctions, Canadian individuals and businesses conducting business internationally may also be subject to international sanctions regimes. Multinational companies will typically need to follow the sanctions regimes of other countries if there is a sufficient nexus in their operations to that jurisdiction. Compliance with Canada’s sanctions may not equate to compliance with other countries’ sanctions since regimes, while somewhat coordinated, are not identical. Individuals and businesses should also take steps to ensure that their business partners are not “designated persons”/subject to an asset freeze under another country’s regime. Anyone conducting international business should take steps to identify international sanctions that apply to them and ensure they are complied with.
See our recent articles: Navigating Canada’s economic sanctions against Russia and Navigating Canada’s sanctions against Russia: New guidance on ownership and control of an entity
This client update is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. If you have any questions about the above, please contact the author.
Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.
Archive
By Brian Tabor, QC and Colin Piercey Bill 81 and Bill 15, receiving Royal Assent in 2013 and 2014 respectively, are due to take effect this month. On June 30, 2017, amendments to the Builders’…
Read MoreNew Brunswick continues to be a thought leader in the field of regulation of recreational cannabis and provides us with a first look at what the provincial regulation of recreational cannabis might look like. New…
Read MoreRick Dunlop and Richard Jordan In Stewart v. Elk Valley Coal Corporation, 2017 SCC 30, a six-judge majority of the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) confirmed a Tribunal decision which concluded that the dismissal of an…
Read MoreBy Kevin Landry New Brunswick’s Working Group on the Legalization of Cannabis released an interim report on June 20, 2017. It is a huge step forward in the legalization process and the first official look at how legalization…
Read MoreRick Dunlop and Kevin Landry As we explained in The Cannabis Act- Getting into the Weeds, the Cannabis Act introduces a regulatory regime for recreational marijuana in Canada. The regime promises to be complex. The details of legalization will be…
Read MoreOn April 1, 2017, the New Brunswick Lobbyists’ Registration Act was proclaimed into force (the “Act”), requiring active professional consultant or in-house lobbyists to register and file returns with the Office of the Integrity Commissioner of New…
Read MoreJoe Thorne and Jessica Habet How far can an insurer dig into the Plaintiff’s history to defend a claim? And how much information is an insurer entitled to have in order to do so? In English v.…
Read MoreNeil Jacobs, QC, Joe Thorne and Meaghan McCaw The Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal recently confirmed that accounting/auditing firms may take on several mandates in respect of companies that may or do become insolvent in Wabush Hotel Limited…
Read MoreJoe Thorne and Brandon Gillespie An independent medical examination (“IME”) is a useful tool for insurers. An IME is an objective assessment of the claimant’s condition for the purpose of evaluating coverage and compensation. Where a…
Read MoreOn June 2, 2017 the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Saadati v. Moorhead, 2017 SCC 28, clarifying the evidence needed to establish mental injury. Neither expert evidence nor a diagnosed psychiatric illness…
Read More