2014

On December 18, 2014, President Obama signed the Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014 (UFSA) into law,broadening the Administration’s authority to impose sanctions in response to continued Russian activity in Ukraine. Although the legislation authorizes the President to increase sanctions, he has stated that “this does not signal a change in the Administration’s sanctions policy” and the Administration does not intend to impose further sanctions at this time.

On December 17, 2014, President Obama announced a major easing of travel and economic restrictions against Cuba as a result of landmark deal between the United States and Cuba. In his remarks, President Obama announced a number of measures which seek to “end an outdated approach . . .” and  “chart a new course in our relations with Cuba and . . . further engage and empower the Cuban people.”

While only Congress can formally overturn the U.S. embargo which has been in place since 1961, the White House has taken some action within its executive powers to liberalize trade and travel to Cuba.  Key components of the Administration’s updated policy approach include the following:

Click here for “West Coast Ocean Cargo Congestion: Facts And Remedies,” Carlos Rodriguez’s original article.

The below surcharges were to have been implemented effective November 17, 2014 by ocean carriers for import/export traffic through the West Coast ports:

There was a loud outburst by shippers and shipper groups, and the Federal Maritime Commission, as did we, questioned the legality of applying the surcharges to cargo already in ocean carriers’ systems either at origin, in route, or at West coast destinations.

All importers and exporters which ship through West Coast ocean ports are by now truly concerned about their cargo being on the shelves in time for sale during the holiday season, and on the export side that their cargo might not reach their buyers any time soon. To add insult to injury, most, if not all ocean carriers have announced congestion surcharges to go into effect on the West Coast November 17, 2014.

Yesterday, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced increased economic sanctions against Russia, including measures against Russia’s largest bank – Sberbank Russia – as well as several state-owned defense technology companies and five energy companies (Gazprom, Gazprom Neft, Lukoil, Surgutneftegas and Rosneft).  The United States has also tightened previous restrictions by lowering from 90 days to 30 days the allowable length of debt U.S. citizens and entities may buy from sanctioned Russian banks – Bank of Moscow, Gazprombank OAO, Vnesheconombank (VEB), Russian Agricultural Bank (Rosselkhozbank),  VTB Bank OAO and Sberbank Russia.

On September 27, 2013, the State Council of the People’s Republic of China issued the Blueprint of the China (Shanghai) Pilot Free Trade Zone (“FTZ”). On September 29, 2013, the FTZ went into effect. This is the first FTZ in China, and, as per the Blueprint, it would relax certain regulatory restrictions – particularly regarding foreign investment in some industries.

As described in our Alert published on August 1, 2014, the United States and other nations have ramped up sanctions against Russia related to the ongoing situation in Ukraine.

On July 31, 2014, the European Union imposed increased sanctions designed to discourage Russia from, in the words of the EU Regulation, “destabilising the situation in Ukraine.”

In response to Russia’s continuing actions in Ukraine, the United States and other nations have implemented increased economic sanctions that significantly broaden the scope of the sanctions previously in place. In addition to the U.S. actions, Canada, the European Union and Japan have imposed similar sanctions against Russia, including asset freezes and individual designations.

Recently, the U.S. Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) promulgated regulations which formally implement the Ukraine-related sanctions set forth in Executive Orders 13660 (“Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine”), 13661 (“Blocking Property of Additional Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine”), and 13662 (“Blocking Property of Additional Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine”). OFAC has made numerous designations of entities and individuals under the executive orders, which can be reviewed here.

The new regulations, entitled the Ukraine-Related Sanctions Regulations (URSR)  31 CFR Part 589, have been published in abbreviated form in an effort to provide immediate guidance to the public. OFAC has indicated that it intends to supplement the regulations in the near future with a more comprehensive set of regulations which may include additional guidance on interpretations and definitions, as well as additional general licenses and statements of licensing policy.

Aaron Mann, a TMT commercial litigation partner, recently gave a presentation in London regarding the differences between litigating commercial disputes in the U.S. versus the UK.  The presentation was done in conjunction with Pinsent Masons, a global law firm with which Husch Blackwell has worked closely for a number of years.  Aaron joined Pinsent Masons partners Richard Twomey (commercial litigation) and Barry Vitou (corporate criminal defense) in the presentation for Pinsent Masons’ clients.

Discovery versus disclosure, the American Rule versus the English Rule, compensatory versus punitive damages, the two systems of litigation are similar at times and worlds apart at others.  This seminar gave the largely-British audience a glimpse of how commercial disputes are prosecuted in the U.S. and what that might mean for a foreign defendant who finds itself in a U.S. courtroom.