UK – OFSI fines bank £165,000 for processing transfers to an entity wholly-owned by designated person

The UK’s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation has issued a Penalty Notice against the London branch of Deutsche Bank AG fining it £165,000.

The fine related to two payments made in June 2022 and July 2022 that had been voluntarily reported to OFSI in September 2022. The “pace” of resolving this matter is in keeping with previous cases from OFSI.

The first payment leading to the fine was of £356,429.27 processed on 29 June 2022 in favour of a company called Okko LLC. Earlier that same day the UK had designated the 100% shareholder of Okko, JSC New Opportunities.

The second payment of £279,189.48 was made a month later.

OFSO took the view (particularly in light of the second payment) that even though there had been a limited window to stop the first payment, nonetheless there was such a window. The screening methods used by Deutsche Bank failed to identify that a newly-designated entity wholly-owned the intended transferee. This failing continued for the next month and was not purely a function of the short window for the first payment.

OFSI also took the view that the breaches could only be seen as such after the UK adopted a strict liability rule for the civil enforcement of sanctions breaches on 15 June 2022. An additional payment made before this date, was not considered a “breach” for this reason.

The notice was resolved under OFSI’s new settlement regime, and involved a 45% discount on what would otherwise have been a £300,000 fine based on the self-disclosure and Deutsche Bank agreeing to settle.

Switzerland – investigation into financial sanctions circumvention

As part of the Annual Report for 2025, Switzerland’s Federal Police Agency (Fedpol) has included information on an investigation into Russian funds held by an unidentified sanctioned Russian oligarch (the report uses the name “Aleksandr*” but this is not the person’s real name.

The report makes mention of a number of suspicious activity reports filed by Swiss private banks, and cooperation with an unnamed foreign country led to a significant investigation:

The investigation revealed that Oleg and Dimitri owned assets in several cantons. The competent foreign criminal prosecution authority submitted a request for mutual legal assistance to the Federal Office of Justice with the aim of searching the premises and seizing the assets of Oleg and Dimitri, in particular bank accounts and real estate. A cantonal public prosecutor’s office was responsible for processing the request for mutual legal assistance. fedpol coordinated the case in Switzerland and abroad. By the end of 2025, the operation was underway, with more than 50 Swiss investigators and prosecutors from several cantons involved.

The seizures would first take place in Switzerland, with further actions in other European countries scheduled to follow. To this day, this remains one of the largest cases involving money laundering for the purpose of evading sanctions“.

The report does not discuss the outcomes of the investigation so far.

United Kingdom – corporate registry moves to dissolve entities sanctioned by the U.S. as related to the IRGC

The OCCRP has reported on actions taken by England’s Companies House to dissolve the company, and crypto exchange, Zedxion Exchange Ltd.

Zedxion is an SDN under U.S. sanctions for its links to Babak Zanjani (another SDN) and the IRGC.

Companies House has posted a notice on the pages for Zedxion stating:

The registrar is intending to take, or has taken, steps to strike off this company under section 1002A of the Companies Act 2006. This relates to information or a statement in an application for incorporation that is misleading, false or deceptive.

As per the OCCRP the false, misleading or deceptive information appears to relate to the identification information provided as to the shareholder, and person of significant control, of Zedxion.

Switzerland – FINMA revokes licence of merchant bank for AML and sanctions compliance failures

The Swiss financial services regulator has put out a press release announcing its decision, taken several weeks ago, to revoke the licence of MBaer Merchant Bank AG for AML and sanctions compliance failings.

Initially the bank appealed this decision.

In the wake of the US regulator FinCEN announcing that it proposed to name the bank as a “financial institution of primary money laundering concern”, the bank has withdrawn the appeal against FINMA’s decision, and a liquidator has now been appointed to oversee the bank’s liquidation.

Sweden – closed criminal investigation into alleged Russian funds transfers

Press reporting of a civil dispute between Sweden’s SEB Bank and certain Russian customers associated with Olga Pavlova, the Vice-Chair of Gazprom, and relating to attempts to transfer SEK 60 million, has revealed that the same transfers had been the subject of now-concluded a preliminary criminal investigation in Sweden.

It is unclear when the investigation took place, or the basis for the conclusion that no crime had been committed.

Austria – Financial Market Authority partially suspends crypto exchange over lack of AML and sanctions compliance officers

Austria’s Financial Market Authority has announced that its has partially suspended its approval for KuCoin EU Exchange GmbH under the EU’s Markets in Crypto Assets regulations.

The suspension means that KuCoin is unable to take on new customers, conclude new contracts, or offer new services.

The suspension is based on the the loss, without replacement, of a Anti-Money Laundering Officer and a Sanctions Compliance Officer.

The FMA has stated that the suspension will remain in place while those positions remain unfilled.

Netherlands – DNB fines imposed on payment services provider upheld on appeal

Further to our earlier post, a payment services provider has brought a further appeal against fines imposed upon it by the Dutch National Bank.

In the previous appeal the original DNB fines of €1.1m and €625,000 had been reduced to €850,190 and €562,500.

Those fines have been upheld in this further appeal.

The defendant company, which had self-reported itself, and which operates ATMs had sought to argue that it was the banks and debit/credit card issuers who had the sanctions screening and due diligence obligations, and that its own self-report could not be used in evidence against it on the basis that it could not be required to incriminate itself.

The court dismissed these objections. The self-reporting had been voluntary and not required and, as a payment service provider, the sanctions compliance obligations also applied to the appellant.

Netherlands – sanctions fine from Financial Markets Authority upheld but reduced on appeal

The Rotterdam District Court has issued its decision in an appeal against a fine imposed by the Dutch Financial Markets Authority (the “AFM”).

Three related fine were initially imposed in 2023 valued at €31,000, €94,000 and €31,000 for a total of €156,000. The fines were for a mixture of compliance failings including, AML, terrorist financing and sanctions. The sanctions compliance failures were a failure to screen customers between 2017 and 2022.

The Claimant, a manager of seven real estate investment funds, appealed against this decision, including (amongst others) on the basis that the fine in relation to sanctions should be struck down because none of the customers were actually subject to sanctions.

The court upheld the fine noting (in machine translation):

“The fact that the AFM’s investigation has shown that the clients of the investment institutions … have not been … on a sanctions list does not detract from the seriousness of the violations either. This circumstance is not relevant to the legal obligations of [Claimant] as gatekeeper in the investigation of those clients and the source(s) of their funds, in order … to comply with the Sanctions Law. The assertion that the [Claimant] often knows the clients personally and that the risks were kept to a minimum … do not detract from this either”.

The fine was, however, reduced by 10% (for a revised total of €148,500) because the enforcement proceedings had taken longer than the 2 years permitted under Dutch law.

United Kingdom – OFSI fines bank £160,000 for Russian sanctions breaches

The UK’s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (“OFSI”) has issued a Penalty Notice to the Bank of Scotland fining the bank £160,000.

The bank opened an account for a designated person in February 2023 and then allowed 24 transactions to and from that account to take place between 8 and 24 February totalling over £77,000.

The bank’s screening system missed the fact that the person was designated, using the spelling in the person’s passport that had a different transliteration from cyrillic than used in the UK’s Consolidated List. One of OFSI’s complaints in the Penalty Notice is that the screening tool was insufficiently able to create a “match” despite the spelling variations.

The designation was first identified because the person was identified as a PEP and adverse media searches then revealed the designation. This was not then escalated to be resolved.

OFSI also noted that the in-house training to the Bank’s staff “was out of date and did not reflect risks associated with the contemporary sanctions landscape, such as the heightened risk posed by Russia sanctions post-2022”.

After an investigation into a different account, the Bank identified this particular account as belonging t a designated person and reported a suspected breach to OFSI on 10 March 2023 and an actual breach to OFSI on 16 March 2023.

The fine was first set at £175,000, including a 50% discount for prompt self-reporting, but this was reduced by OFSI, after further representations from the bank, to £160,000.

In the Penalty Notice’s “Notes on Compliance” attention is drawn to the failure to use a sufficiently robust screening tool, the lack of a clear escalation procedure, and the poor training.

The Penalty Notice does not name the designated person, but similarities indicate that this notice relates to the UK’s conviction of Dmitri Ovsiannikov (see our earlier post).

© 2009- Duane Morris LLP. Duane Morris is a registered service mark of Duane Morris LLP.

The opinions expressed on this blog are those of the author and are not to be construed as legal advice.

Proudly powered by WordPress