OFAC revokes so-called U-turn authorization for Cuba-related financial transactions
OFAC published a final rule that modifies the Cuban Assets Control Regulations to revoke the so-called "U-turn" authorization.
On June 1, 2016, amendments affecting litigation before Russian Arbitrazh (commercial) courts will come into effect.
The Arbitrazh Procedure Code of the Russian Federation (“APC”) will provide for manda-tory pre-trial procedures for most commercial disputes. As a general rule, the claimant will need to send a claim letter to the respondent before commencing litigation.
The Russian Supreme Court pushed forward a series of amendments to the APC aimed at reducing the number of disputes resolved by the courts and, thus, reducing their caseload.
Starting from June 1, 2016, a civil law dispute may be resolved by an Arbitrazh court only after the parties have attempted to resolve it through a pre-trial procedure.
As a general rule, the claimant would need to serve a claim letter to comply with the pre-trial procedure, although different procedures (e.g. mediation) may be prescribed by law or agreed upon by the parties. A suit may be filed with the Arbitrazh court 30 days after the day when the claim letter was sent to the other party to the dispute; however a different term may be prescribed by law or the parties’ agreement (Art. 4(5) APC).
The APC provides for the following list of disputes in which compliance with pre-trial procedures is not required:
Compliance with pre-trial procedures is mandatory for all other categories of civil-law disputes, including non-contractual disputes arising out of unjust enrichment or tort. However, this requirement does not apply to cases arising out of administrative and other public law matters.
Information on compliance with the pre-trial procedure by the claimant should be included into the statement of claim (Art. 125(2)(8) APC). Documentary evidence to prove that should be exhibited to the statement of claim (Art. 126(1)(7) APC). If these requirements are not complied with, the statement of claim will be shelved by the court in accordance with Art. 128(1) APC.
If the court determines that claimant failed to comply with the mandatory pre-trial procedure it returns the statement of claim (Art. 129(1)(5) APC). If the court establishes this only after initiating proceedings, the court leaves the claim without consideration (Art. 148(1)(2) APC).
A claim letter is a statement addressed to the other party of the dispute that claims for voluntary remediation of a breach. The claim letter should be served in writing.
In practice the claim letter should usually include the following information:
It is advisable to serve a claim letter by registered mail with confirmation of delivery and list of enclosures. The letter should be served at the other party’s address as indicated in the Uniform State Register of Legal Entities. If a different address of the counterparty is indicated in the contract, the claim letter should be served at both addresses.
In addition, the claim letter may be served via email if: (i) a proper email address for communication between the parties was agreed upon by the parties; or (ii) such email address is specifically indicated at the official website of the party.
A 30-day period should expire prior to filing the law suit with the court. This starts running from the date of dispatch of the claim letter, rather than from the moment it was received by the other party.
The limitation period is suspended for the duration of out-of-court procedures specified by law or contract. If no specific duration is provided for, the limitation period is suspended for 6 months starting from the date of commencement of the out-of-court procedures (Art. 202(3) Russian Civil Code).
In accordance with the views of the Supreme Arbitrazh Court and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federa-tion, a mandatory pre-trial procedure is considered to be an out-of-court procedure for these purposes. Hence, the limitation period will be suspended from the moment when the claim letter is dispatched at least until the expiration of the 30-day period provided for by the APC.
On 5 September 2019, Professor John McMillan AO’s Final Report (Report) on the operation of the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967 (ND Act) was tabled in Parliament. Section 26A of the ND Act required the Minster to cause a review of the operation of the ND Act to be undertaken.