United Kingdom – further charges against individual already facing prosecution for breaching Russian sanctions

As an addition to the existing prosecution it is being reported that the National Crime Agency has added two new charges to those against Alexei Owsjanikow. It is alleged that he paid £41,027.25 on behalf of his brother-in-law, designated person Dmitrii Ovsiannikov, towards private school fees.

The payments are said to have been made in May this year, which would be after Owsjanikow had already been charged with other sanctions offences.

The trial for this prosecution is currently scheduled for March 2025.

United Kingdom – HMRC drops investigation into alleged perfume exports to Russia

Further to our earlier post about an HMRC criminal investigation into the alleged export of luxury perfume to Russia, it is now being reported by the BBC that the investigation has been dropped.

The report does not explain the rationale for discontinuing the investigation, but notes the the primary individual involved, a Mr Crisp, had been recorded on video by a private investigator who asked “How’s your Russian market”, to which the recorded response was “We’re doing really well… we ignore government edicts”.

Another director of the company compiled evidence of the alleged sanction breaches, and provided that to the authorities.

That example of self-reporting and co-operation may well explain why the company was not itself prosecuted. It is unclear why the director Mr Crisp has not been pursued. The investigation first came to light after a civil court ruled there was “strong prima facie evidential basis for the allegations” and ordered the removal of Mr Crisp from his position as director of the company.

United Kingdom – CPS advising on two further criminal prosecutions

Global Investigations Review (behind a paywall) has published the results of a Freedom of Information request to the Crown Prosecution Service which reveals that the CPS has been asked to advise on a total of three cases under Russian sanctions, two of which are not otherwise in the public domain.

One of the newly-revealed relates to financial sanctions, and the other to trade sanctions.

The third is case relates to the ongoing prosecution of three individuals.

The CPS has not yet added this Freedom of Information response to its website.

European sanctions enforcement: the custodial sentences

Although one of the filters on this blog is “custodial sentence”, I thought it might be helpful to collect all the examples in one place.

As such, here is the full list of custodial sentences that have been imposed across Europe for sanctions offences since 2017. Please note this excludes suspended sentences.

2017:

2018:

2019:

2020:

2021:

2022:

2023:

2024:

Overall the figures are dominated by the Netherlands and Germany with approximately 68 of the 80 years of sentences between them. Indeed, as the graph below demonstrates, other than Finland’s 40-day sentence for breaching a travel ban, the Netherlands and Germany are the only European countries to have sent someone to prison for sanctions offences since 2019.

United Kingdom – revised (and increased) figures for the number of OFSI’s oil price cap investigations: 60 to date

As of 27 September 2024, the position as regards OFSI’s investigations into alleged breaches of the UK’s oil price cap was as follows (covering the period from 5 December 2022 to 21 August 2024:

  • total number of investigations commenced: 60
  • total number of investigations commenced where the alleged suspect is a UK person or company: 52
  • total number of investigations which remain open: 42
  • total number of investigations which remain open where the alleged suspect is a UK person or company: 37

These figures revise those we published last month which were based on the BBC’s reporting of the results of a Freedom of Information request it had made to OFSI.

After obtaining a copy of what was released to the BBC by making our own Freedom of Information request we have been able to revise the figures. The BBC did not include in its figures the investigations into non-UK persons potentially breaching the UK’s oil price cap.

What the complete figures reveal is that a further 8 investigations have been commenced into non-UK persons suspected of breaching the oil price cap, of which 5 remain ongoing.

A copy of HM Treasury’s response to our asking for the response provided to the BBC is here.

United Kingdom – 9 law firms referred for investigation for possible sanctions breaches

The Solicitors Regulation Authority for England and Wales has, in its Annual Report for Money Laundering covering 2023/2024, has stated that it has required 9 law firms to report themselves to the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation.

In eight of these instances the breach was a breach of a licence condition. It is unclear whether these were specific licences or a General Licence. The breaches are said to have varied between late or no reporting, and taking payments not actually covered by the licence in question.

While many have related to the UK’s Russian sanctions no information is given as to the identity of the sanctions regime(s) in question.

United Kingdom – HMRC compound penalties for Russian sanctions and export control violations totaling £1.9m

The UK’s HMRC has issued several “Notices to Exporters” with updates as to recent enforcement activity.

In one Notice, HMRC states that is has agreed three compound penalties with different entities:

  • “August 2024 – £402,417.75 was paid relating to the unlicensed exports of military goods controlled by The Export Control Order 2008
  • August 2024 – £37,743.34 was paid relating to the unlicensed exports of dual-use goods controlled by Retained Regulation 428/2009
  • September 2024 – £1,480,785.44 was paid relating to the unlicensed exports of military goods controlled by The Export Control Order 2008″

As ever with such penalties the nature of the offending is not given, the identity of the offender is not given, and no indication is given as to whether or not the fine includes a confiscation element for the proceeds of the crimes.

In a second Notice, HMRC describes the compound penalty:

“August 2024 – £58,426.45 was paid relating to the export of goods in breach of The Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019”.

Again, no other details or information is provided, although HMRC notes that this is its 6th compound penalty in relation to Russian sanctions totaling £1,363,129.

United Kingdom – 37 ongoing oil price cap investigations

The BBC is reporting the results of a Freedom of Information Act request it has made to OFSI.

The response itself is not currently on the website of either OFSI or HM Treasury.

The BBC is reporting the following statistics:

  • 52 investigations opened since December 2022
  • 15 of those have been concluded with no further action taken; and
  • 37 of the investigations are ongoing.

As per our earlier post, in an earlier Freedom of Information response OFSI confirmed that as of April 2024 it had started 12 investigations of which 9 had been discontinued without action taken.

As such 40 new oil price cap investigations have been started since April 2024.

Since April six investigations have been concluded.

UK – FCA fines bank £29m for sanctions compliance failings

The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority has today fined Starling Bank £28,959,426 for sanctions compliance failings.

The Final Notice states that the bank became aware in January 2023 that its screening was being done against a small sub-set of the Consolidated List of sanctions targets.

The FCA described the compliance program at Starling as “shockingly lax”.

The FCA also noted that the fine would have been £40,959,426 without Starling’s agreement to resolve the matter.

UK – OFSI imposes £15,000 civil penalty

The UK’s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation has today issued notice of a civil monetary penalty it has imposed on a company called Integral Concierge Services Limited (“ICSL”).

The penalty was for £15,000.

The fine related to 26 payments made to, or received from, a designated person under the UK’s Russian sanctions. The payments related to property management including collecting rent, paying for maintenance, and ICSL taking its own management fees. The designated person was not named.

The company did not initially self-disclose, but did then cooperate including by disclosing breaches that had not yet been identified by OFSI.

The company also breaches the reporting requirements under several general licences, but OFSO chose to not fine in relation to those breaches but rather to treat those failures as aggravating factors.

© 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