The EU and the US both made significant changes to their sanctions just prior to the Christmas holidays, ranging from a brand-new EU sanctions programme against Yemen to the history-making reduction of US sanctions against Cuba.
28.1.2015
Sanctions—The Carrot or the Stick? In Most Recent Changes, A Bit of Both
Heidi Paalanen-Koev
Perhaps the most noticeable impact of sanctions on day-to-day life in Finland, has come from the sanctions imposed by the EU and the US in response to the crisis in Ukraine. The EU and US also made changes in their respective Ukraine-related sanctions programmes during the holidays.
Sanctions are naturally designed to discourage behavior which would otherwise naturally occur. However, it may be fair to refer to certain exemptions, exceptions and the grant of licenses to continue business that would otherwise be prohibited as the “carrots” which are meant to ease the burdens of the sanctions world.
New Carrots in the Form of General Licenses to Continue Business
During the last month of 2014, the US authorities announced the offer of two particularly significant “carrots”. Specifically General License No. 4 which authorises the export and re-export of certain medicines, medical supplies, replacement parts for medical supplies and certain agricultural products to the Crimea region of Ukraine.
Even more significantly, the US granted General License No. 5 to allow the performance of any activities necessary to the winding down or divestiture or transfer of a U.S. person’s share of ownership in investments located in Crimea, of operations, contracts, or other agreements involving the importation of any goods, services, or technology from Crimea into the United States. It also allows activities necessary for the winding down of operations, contracts, or other agreements involving the exportation, re-exportation, sale, or supply of goods, services, or technology to Crimea.
This grace period for winding down activities expires at 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, February 1, 2015. All of the General Licenses granted by the US authorities are available for use by any individual or entity that is required to obey the US sanctions and General License No. 5 in particular may grant significant relief to those facing the sudden end of existing business in the Crimea.
However, this relief also comes with certain restrictions. General License No. 5 does not allow transactions with sanctioned individuals or entities and also does not allow any continuation of performing the contracts by exporting, re-exporting or importing goods between the US and Crimea. Also, a report on the activities conducted to wind-down the existing business activity must be submitted to OFAC no later than 10 days after the winding down activities have been completed.
New Sticks Imposed by the US and the EU
US new sanctions
While the US has provided some measure of relief for certain market participants, it also enacted during December 2014 new restrictions via new and expanded sanctions against Crimea. These new US sanctions came in the form of the new Ukraine Freedom Support Act, which became effective on 18 December, and a new Executive Order issued by President Obama on 19 December 2014.
The Ukraine Freedom Support Act may have only a limited impact initially, as most of its provisions are discretionary and grant the US President expanded power to impose sanctions, but no obligation to impose sanctions in most cases. One exception is the new sanctions on the Russian state arms company, Rosoboronexport. The new Act requires President Obama to impose sanctions on Rosoboronexport on or around 17 January 2015, which must be chosen from a list of possible sanctions included in the text of the new Act. Furthermore, the new Act authorises sanctions against Gazprom, the Russian energy giant, if the US President determines that Gazprom is withholding significant natural gas resources from Ukraine, Georgia or Moldova.
The Executive Order of 19 December also significantly expanded the existing US sanctions against the Crimea region of Ukraine and persons obliged to obey the US sanctions are now prohibited from making investments in, exporting to or importing from Crimea, providing financing for such activities and more. Indeed, the US sanctions against Crimea are so extensive that it may be fair to generalize by saying that most activities in Crimea or intended for Crimea are now prohibited by the US sanctions.
EU new sanctions
The EU also enacted new sanctions against the Crimea during the holiday season. The new EU sanctions greatly expanded the scope of the existing sanctions against the Crimea. Before the December changes, the business prohibited formerly included only the Crimean infrastructure industries of transportation, telecommunications and energy. The scope has been greatly expanded such that now most business activities connected to Crimea are prohibited by the EU sanctions.
The industries of tourism and real estate have been directly affected as it is now illegal to carry out tourism operations or real estate transactions in the Crimea and tourist ships are no longer to stop in Crimean ports. Furthermore, the new EU sanctions include an extensive list of more than 150 different categories of goods, technologies and services which can no longer be provided to the Crimea.
Fortunately for businesses who have existing business in Crimea, the new EU sanctions do include some automatic extensions of the deadline for compliance, to soften the economic blow on EU companies which must now face the loss of their existing business in the Crimea.
In some cases, contracts entered into before 20 December 2014 may in some cases be continued for as long as necessary to complete the obligations under that contract, so long as the parties notify the appropriate authorities at least 5 days before taking any actions under that contract. While in other cases, contracts entered into before 20 December 2014 can be continued only until 21 March 2015 and the proper authorities still must be notified 5 days in advance of any actions taken to fulfill the contract. Additionally, tourist ships may still stop in Crimean ports in case of emergency, so long as the appropriate authorities are notified of the port visit not less than 5 days after the port visit took place.
Knowledge is Power
As the recent changes to the sanctions regime illustrate, the exact nature of the sanctions and precisely what is and is not prohibited tends to change over time. Companies that remain alert to changes in the sanctions programmes are best able to both protect themselves from the loss of important business and to identify business opportunities not affected by sanctions restrictions.
Educating yourself about the sanctions, and consulting with legal advisors in complex matters, can help ensure that your business can adapt quickly to the changing business environment and continue to do business with confidence.
Latest news
Latest references
Finnish Broadcasting Company – Appeal in a defamation case dismissed by the Monegasque Supreme Court
We successfully advised the Finnish Broadcasting Company, Yleisradio Oy, and its Editor in Chief in a defamation case before all levels of the Monegasque judiciary. The case concerned four articles published by Yleisradio in 2022, two of which were in Finnish and two in English. The counterparty was of the opinion that the claims made in the articles violated his honour and brought defamation charges against Yleisradio and its Editor in Chief in Monegasque courts. In addition, he claimed damages totalling EUR 100,000 and demanded the removal of all allegedly defamatory content under penalty of a fine. We challenged the jurisdiction of the Monegasque courts in the matter, as the articles were not directed at a Monegasque audience and, contrary to what the counterparty claimed, jurisdiction could not be based solely on the fact that the articles were published in English on the internet where they were available for all and could be translated into French using a browser functionality. Furthermore, we presented comprehensive arguments stating that the facts presented in the articles were truthful, presented in good faith as required by Monegasque legislation, and based on thorough research. We also highlighted that the counterparty’s actions constituted so-called forum shopping, i.e. the desire to have the case heard in a court he believed would be most favourable to him. The claim was heard by all three levels of Monegasque courts, as the counterparty appealed the judgments of the lower courts. The courts of first and second instance had deemed that the Yleisradio articles in question were not directed at a Monegasque audience, and the Monegasque courts were therefore not competent to hear the case. The Supreme Court of Monaco (Cour de Révision) stated that there were no grounds to link the allegedly defamatory claims to the country. Even though it was possible to access the online articles from Monaco as well, this did not mean that the articles were published in Monaco. This being the case, the Supreme Court of Monaco deemed that the local courts did not have jurisdiction to rule on the case and dismissed the counterparty’s appeal against the Court of Appeal’s decision. The Supreme Court’s decision is fundamental in upholding the freedom of expression in Europe. The opposite outcome would have encouraged similar intimidation lawsuits in countries favourable to the plaintiff, with the purpose of restricting dialogue and silencing critical voices. The unpredictability of judicial power and the risk of extensive – and expensive – trials could create an atmosphere of fear and increase self-censorship of those exercising their freedom of expression, especially journalists, other media professionals and researchers. The decision also reinforces the principle that forum shopping is not allowed. The Supreme Court’s decision is final.
Case published 17.6.2025
Ilkka Paananen Foundation – Legal assessment of a chatbot system using generative AI
We advised the Ilkka Paananen Foundation on a legal review relating to the use of a chatbot system utilising generative artificial intelligence. The AI system provides conversational support to young people experiencing mental health issues and various life crises. Our advice covered the AI Act, which regulates advanced AI systems, as well as data protection and other relevant local legislation.
Case published 16.6.2025
eQ Commercial Properties Fund – Sale of a fully let light industrial property
We are assisting eQ Commercial Properties Fund in the sale of a fully let property to Logistea AB (publ), with an underlying property value of EUR 25 million. The property is transferred through the sale of the shares in the property-owning company Kiinteistö Oy Hämeenlinnan Länsiportintie 15. Logistea is a Swedish real estate company focusing on warehousing, logistic and light industrial properties, and its shares are listed on Nasdaq Stockholm. The property was built in 2012, and it is located in Hämeenlinna. The property has a total lettable area of approximately 21,700 square meters and the entire property is leased by Faerch Finland Oy, a fully owned subsidiary to Faerch A/S which is a leading provider of sustainable, circular food packaging solutions.
Case published 5.6.2025
Gasum – Acquisition of NSR Biogas AB and Liquidgas Biofuels Genesis AB
We advised Gasum when it acquired 100% of the shares in NSR Biogas AB and the remaining 1/3 of the shares in Liquidgas Biofuels Genesis AB. Gasum has already been the majority owner of Liquidgas Biofuels Genesis AB since 2023 and is now acquiring full ownership. Gasum is a Nordic gas sector and energy market expert. Gasum offers cleaner energy and energy market expert services for industry and for combined heat and power production as well as cleaner fuel solutions for road and maritime transport. The company helps its customers to reduce their own carbon footprint as well as that of their customers.
Case published 5.6.2025