Skip to content

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.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Good Faith Fisheries: New case on Crown consultation & regulation of Aboriginal fisheries

March 22, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor Why is this case a big deal? It started with two salmon. Now, after several years of litigation, the Nova Scotia Provincial Court in R v Martin, 2016 NSPC 14 has stayed proceedings against…

Read More

Atlantic Employers’ Counsel – Winter 2016

March 10, 2016

THE EDITORS’ CORNER Michelle Black and Sean Kelly One day, the line between mental and physical disabilities may not be so pronounced, but, for now, distinctions are still drawn between Employee A with, for example, diabetes and…

Read More

Hiring the “Right” Employee

February 24, 2016

By Lisa Gallivan Employees can be your biggest asset, if you hire the right people. This can often be one of the biggest decisions that you make as a business owner or employer. The “right” employee…

Read More

Bye, Bye Canadian P.I.?: What Apple’s fight against the FBI means for the protection of Personal Information in Canada

February 23, 2016

By Burtley Francis and Kathleen Leighton Order Up: Apple, P.I. Recently, the public safety versus personal privacy debate has been brought to main headlines. Apple is facing a court order (available here) requiring the company to assist the FBI in the investigation of…

Read More

Client Update: Outlook for the 2016 Proxy Season

February 12, 2016

In preparing for the 2016 proxy season, you should be aware of some regulatory changes and institutional investor guidance that may impact disclosure to and interactions with your shareholders. This update highlights what is new…

Read More

Left Sharks and Copy Cats: The Super Bowl’s Impact on Protecting a Brand

February 5, 2016

By Burtley Francis and Michael MacIsaac You remember Left Shark… The Super Bowl is a lot of things to a lot of people and is arguably the most anticipated event of the year that is not a holiday…

Read More

The Labour Relations of First Nations’ Fisheries: Who gets to decide?

February 2, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor Summary The Canada Industrial Relations Board recently held that it had no jurisdiction as a federal board to certify a bargaining unit comprised of fisheries employees of the Waycobah First Nation. The decision…

Read More

Can an employer prohibit tattoos and piercings?

January 21, 2016

By Peter McLellan, QC In the 1970s the issue for employers was long hair and sideburns. In the 1980’s it was earrings for men. Today the employer’s concerns are with tattoos and facial piercings. What are…

Read More

Settling for it: Two new NS decisions on settlement agreements and releases

January 15, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor Introduction It sounds simple: Two disputing parties, hoping to resolve their disagreement without drawn-out court proceedings, will mutually agree to a settlement on clear terms; release each other from all claims; and move…

Read More

Labour and Employment Legislative Update 2015

December 23, 2015

2015 ends with changes in workplace laws that our region’s employers will want to be aware of moving into 2016. Some legislation has been proclaimed and is in force, some has passed and will be…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top