Sanctions compliance as a basis for non-performance of contractual obligations

Cayle Lupton
{"title":"Sanctions compliance as a basis for non-performance of contractual obligations","authors":"Cayle Lupton","doi":"10.1016/j.jeconc.2024.100101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Targeted financial sanctions are routinely used to combat financial crime. As they are endorsed by the United Nations and the Financial Action Task Force, the vast majority of jurisdictions have established regulatory frameworks that make provision for targeted financial sanctions. These frameworks translate into compliance obligations and expectations for so-called regulated entities, which includes banks. Although sanctions have been the subject of much discourse recently in the wake of the escalation of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the risk of non-performance of contractual obligations due to sanctions compliance has not been explored sufficiently. The objective of this contribution is to shed light on the distinction between compliance with domestic sanctions and compliance with foreign sanctions with specific reference to the risk of non-performance of contractual obligations. It focuses on the basis and legal implications of compliance in each case within the context of the bank-customer relationship. This is undertaken primarily from a South African perspective. The contribution finds that compliance with domestic sanctions may give rise to an interference with contractual performance that is rooted in law, while compliance with foreign sanctions may necessitate an interference that is based on either a contractual provision (force majeure clause) or business and reputational considerations. In both instances, clients of banks are less certain that their payment instructions will be processed and banks, in turn, run the risk of being sued. This tension between sanctions and international banking and finance requires serious reflection by the relevant authorities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100775,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Criminology","volume":"6 ","pages":"Article 100101"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949791424000538","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Targeted financial sanctions are routinely used to combat financial crime. As they are endorsed by the United Nations and the Financial Action Task Force, the vast majority of jurisdictions have established regulatory frameworks that make provision for targeted financial sanctions. These frameworks translate into compliance obligations and expectations for so-called regulated entities, which includes banks. Although sanctions have been the subject of much discourse recently in the wake of the escalation of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the risk of non-performance of contractual obligations due to sanctions compliance has not been explored sufficiently. The objective of this contribution is to shed light on the distinction between compliance with domestic sanctions and compliance with foreign sanctions with specific reference to the risk of non-performance of contractual obligations. It focuses on the basis and legal implications of compliance in each case within the context of the bank-customer relationship. This is undertaken primarily from a South African perspective. The contribution finds that compliance with domestic sanctions may give rise to an interference with contractual performance that is rooted in law, while compliance with foreign sanctions may necessitate an interference that is based on either a contractual provision (force majeure clause) or business and reputational considerations. In both instances, clients of banks are less certain that their payment instructions will be processed and banks, in turn, run the risk of being sued. This tension between sanctions and international banking and finance requires serious reflection by the relevant authorities.
将遵守制裁作为不履行合同义务的依据
有针对性的金融制裁是打击金融犯罪的常规手段。由于定向金融制裁得到了联合国和金融行动特别工作组的认可,绝大多数司法管辖区都建立了监管框架,对定向金融制裁做出了规定。这些框架转化为所谓受监管实体(包括银行)的合规义务和期望。尽管最近在俄乌冲突升级后,制裁一直是人们热议的话题,但因遵守制裁而导致合同义务无法履行的风险却未得到充分探讨。本文旨在阐明遵守国内制裁与遵守国外制裁之间的区别,并特别提及不履行合同义务的风险。重点是在银行与客户关系的背景下,每种情况下遵守制裁的依据和法律影响。这主要是从南非的角度进行的。文章认为,遵守国内制裁可能会导致以法律为基础的对合同履行的干预,而遵守国外制裁则可能需要以合同条款(不可抗力条款)或商业和声誉考虑为基础的干预。在这两种情况下,银行客户都不太确定他们的付款指示是否会得到处理,而银行则面临被起诉的风险。制裁与国际银行和金融之间的这种紧张关系需要有关当局认真思考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信