The U.K. High Court in a decision released Nov. 15 said Senegalese oil trading company Der Mond Oil and Gas couldn't rely on sanctions as a reason for not paying Russian company Litasco SA for money due under an oil sale contract.

More than a month after a British appellate court suggested the U.K. government could treat every Russian public and private entity as a sanctioned party because they can potentially be controlled by Russian President Vladimir Putin, a U.K. sanctions agency said it doesn’t plan to enforce its sanctions in that manner. The court ruling had caused widespread concern among the U.K. legal and business community, but the U.K.’s latest guidance means that uncertainty “is effectively resolved,” said law firm Osborne Clarke.

The EU General Court on Nov. 8 rejected a Russian CEO's application to annul his sanctions designation. The court said the European Council properly laid out a statement of reasons for the sanctions decision, adding that the council "adduced a set of sufficiently specific, precise and consistent indicia capable of demonstrating" that Dmitry Mazepin "is a leading businessperson involved in a sector providing a substantial source of revenue to the Russian Government."

The EU General Court on Nov. 8 rejected Mikalai Varabei's application to annul his sanctions listing under the EU's Belarus sanctions regime. Varabei was challenging the European Council's finding that his activities in various Belarussian economic sectors show that he benefits from President Aleksandr Lukashenko's regime.

The European Council reappointed two judges and an advocate-general for terms running Oct. 7, 2024, to Oct. 6, 2030. Constantinos Lycourgos and Jan Passer were reappointed judges and Giovanni Pitruzzella advocate-general as part of the "partial renewal of the composition of the Court of Justice in 2024," the council said.

A recent ruling by a U.K. appellate court “sent the sanctions legal community into a bit of a tailspin” after it appeared to pave the way for the government to treat every Russian public and private entity as a sanctioned party, said Daniel Martin, a sanctions lawyer with HFW. Although the U.K. has since clarified that its sanctions aren’t necessarily meant to apply to every Russian company, Martin said questions remain, including whether banks now will be even less willing to handle Russia-related transactions, whether U.K. lawyers will continue to be able to participate in Russian-related proceedings, and whether similar logic could apply to U.K. sanctions against other countries.

The Rotterdam District Court on Oct. 31 sentenced an unnamed Russian businessman to an 18-month prison term for violating the EU's Russia sanctions, according to an unofficial translation. The charges against the man include selling dual-use goods, including a "certain type of integrated circuit" and drones to Russian companies, along with selling, delivering, transferring and exporting nine other integrated circuit types to the same unnamed Russian companies.

The U.K. High Court on Oct. 26 rejected an application from Russian oligarch Mikhail Fridman to overturn the U.K.'s decision to refuse three licenses for payments related to the businessman's property and his management company. The court said the U.K.'s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation legally concluded that a license may not be granted if the payment is made "directly" or "indirectly" to another designated individual or entity.

The U.K. on Oct. 25 issued a new license under its Russia and Belarus sanctions regimes related to certain legal services payments, replacing the current license that was scheduled to expire Oct. 28 (see 2305010012), according to the EU Sanctions blog. Under the new license, the cap for services based on a prior obligation and services not based on a prior obligation may not exceed 10% of the "amount payable for the professional legal fees and Counsel's fees," or around $60,700, whichever is lower.

The EU General Court on Oct. 25 annulled the listing of the ex-wife of Alfa Group founder Mikhail Fridman, referred to only as "QF" in the opinion, according to an unofficial translation. Originally sanctioned in April 2022, QF was delisted five months later. The court annulled her original listing. QF claimed the European Council based its decision on evidence lacking probative value and erroneously assessed the facts.