Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
While it is typically more likely that cybersecurity issues are handled as a separate compliance function within an organization to the anti-money laundering and sanctions function(s), the cybersecurity function should not act within a vacuum; all of these functions ultimately also have the similar goal of protecting system integrity.
For example, in a given set of circumstances in the event of a cybersecurity incident affecting a financial institution, a regulator will likely need to be satisfied that the sanctions and anti-money laundering teams have robust knowledge, capacity, experience and training in dealing with cybersecurity issues. The respective cybersecurity, sanctions and anti-money laundering teams therefore need to work together, including as regards the teams providing each other practical skills and knowledge.
As is well known, the United Kingdom (UK) is set to leave the EU as of March 2019 under a process more colloquially known as Brexit. Among the significant number of legal and compliance areas that will be affected are sanctions and anti-money laundering. This article provides a brief education about where things currently stand in the UK as regards to sanctions and anti-money laundering in the shifting sands of the Brexit process.
Sanctions are applied in a variety of situations and are sometimes divided into:
In the UK, sanctions may affect organizations in different ways. For example, criminal offenses may be committed if financial dealings are undertaken with certain entities or individuals, or businesses may be asked to provide information about their accounts or assets. Offenses may also be committed for failing to report breaches of sanctions.
In a word, yes. Sanctions and anti-money laundering are currently very much EU-based and driven — anti-money laundering legislation comes from the EU and sanctions are essentially centralized at the EU level, albeit run nationally at the enforcement level. Therefore Brexit will have a major impact, notably in enforcement.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.