The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) protects natural persons in the scope of the processing of their personal data and the free movement of such data within the EU. That seems simple enough. Natural persons are living and breathing individual human beings. Processing is processing and personal data is personal data, right?
Information that concerns legal persons may at the same time be personal data of a natural person, and vice versa. They overlap. So where do we draw the line between personal data that should be protected under the GDPR, and personal data which shouldn’t? (Siarhei Varankevich and Olga Zavalniuk)
However, things are not always as easy as they seem with the GDPR.
As mentioned in a previous article, the definition of personal data as well as the types of identifiers or personally identifiable information (PII) has broadened significantly and it’s important to understand how personal data and identifiers lead to potential identification (even if methods such as pseudonymization and anonymization are used).
Secondly, processing means quite a few activities concerning personal data of natural persons as well.
So, it’s not just important to understand personal data processing principles but also to know what exactly processing is.
You process personal data when someone fills in a form on your website, granting you consent to send him/her a newsletter; you process personal data when you receive job applications; you process personal data when simply handing over lists of customers in your capacity as a data controller to a data processor such as your accountant; you process personal data when downloading an Excel file containg them on a USB stick; but you also process personal data if you simply store them. The list is pretty long.
So, less easy than it seems and explained in several articles. Yet, it doesn’t stop there. Even a term as simple as natural persons isn’t that easy at all.
Personal data of legal persons and personal data of natural persons: the issue with Recital 14
As you can read in the GDPR articles (Article 2) on the material scope of the GDPR not all personal data of natural persons fall under the GDPR. Just one example: personal data by a natural person in the course of a purely personal or household activity.
Yet, there is more. Many people have a tiny one-person business or are self-employed whereby there are different mechanisms, depending on country, to incorporate their activities in some form of undertaking.
That could be some form of sole proprietorship, for example. Again, the precise name and ‘legal form’ depend.
In its recitals (Recital 14) the GDPR says that it only applies to natural persons and does not cover the processing of personal data concerning legal persons, in particular undertakings established as legal persons or legal entities. And this includes the name of the legal person, the form and also the contact details of the legal person.
With regard to the processing of data which concern legal persons and in particular undertakings established as legal persons, including the name and the form of the legal person and the contact details of the legal person, the protection of this Regulation should not be claimed by any person. This should also apply where the name of the legal person contains the names of one or more natural persons. (European Parliament’s draft of the GDPR, sentence not in the final text of the GDPR)
So, imagine the name of our tiny business wasn’t i-SCOOP but “Founderlastnamexyz Media”.
This is the case for many self-employed consultants, lawyers, accountants and so forth (except for the imaginary “media” part).
Moreover, many aren’t just self-employed but have one or the other form of sole proprietorships which could also carry their name or even another form of undertaking with two or three people in the same case.
Very often self-employed people and really tiny undertakings with specific activities operate from the private address of the owner which then doubles as the address of the undertaking. You start seeing the picture.
2018 Year-End Sanctions Update
February 11, 2019
Click for PDF
2018 was another extraordinary year in sanctions development and enforcement. This past year may take its place in history as the point at which the United States abandoned the Iran nuclear deal—the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the “JCPOA”)—and re-imposed nuclear sanctions on Iran.
Defying the expectations of many observers, the Trump administration went further than anticipated and re-imposed all nuclear-related sanctions on Iran, culminating in the November 5, 2018 addition of over 700 individuals, entities, aircraft, and vessels to the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (“SDN”) List—the largest single set of sanctions designations to date. This action increased the SDN List by more than 10 percent and brought the total number of persons designated in 2018 to approximately 1,500—50 percent more than has ever been added to the SDN List in any single year.
Source: Graph Compiled from Data Released by the Office of Foreign Assets Control
In any prior year, the U.S. decision to abandon the JCPOA would have dominated the pages of our client alerts. But 2018 was no ordinary year, and OFAC continued to enhance the impact of U.S. sanctions against Russia while rumors of election interference filled the airwaves.
On April 6, 2018, the Trump Administration announced a bold set of new designations, including nearly 40 Russian oligarchs, officials, and related entities, including major publicly traded companies.
After the companies took significant steps to disentangle from Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, OFAC delisted EN+, Rusal, and JSC EuroSibEnergo (“ESE”) on December 19, 2018.
But that’s not all. Political and economic conditions in Venezuela continued to deteriorate, and in May Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro was elected to a new six-year term in an election that the United States government has described as a “sham” and “neither free nor fair.
” Venezuela’s economy—which remains heavily dependent on the state-owned oil company, Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A. (“PdVSA”)—continued its sharp decline amid a collapse in oil production.
Against that grim backdrop, the United States continued to gradually expand sanctions targeting members of President Maduro’s inner circle and sources of financing for the Venezuelan state. On January 28, 2019, OFAC formally designated PdVSA.
As with years past, 2018 witnessed the expanding use of sanctions as a foreign policy tool and will provide much fodder for those debating the long-term geopolitical impact of economic sanctions. But our purpose here is more circumspect: a recap of the continuing evolution of sanctions in 2018 and preparation for what may come next.
I. Major U.S. Program Developments
We have spilled much ink on the changing contours of the Iran sanctions regime.
As we first described in our May 9 client alert, the re-imposition of Iran sanctions was subject to 90- and 180- day “wind-down” periods, expiring on August 6 and November 5, respectively.
During these periods, companies were instructed to terminate Iran-related operations that would be targeted by the pending sanctions.
OFAC placed the remaining sanctions relief into wind-down on June 27, as we described here, by withdrawing general authorizations that had permitted U.S. persons to negotiate contingent contracts related to commercial passenger aviation; import and deal in Iranian-origin carpets and foodstuffs; and facilitate the engagement of their non-U.S. subsidiaries in transactions involving Iran.
Upon the termination of the first wind-down period on August 6, as we described here, President Trump issued a new executive order authorizing the re-imposition of “secondary” sanctions targeting non-U.S. persons who engage in certain Iran-related transactions involving U.S.
dollars, precious metals, the Iranian rial, certain metals, or Iranian sovereign debt. On November 5, as we described here, the remaining secondary sanctions were re-imposed. These included sanctions targeting non-U.S.
person participation in transactions with Iran’s port operators or its shipping, ship building, and energy sectors; involving petroleum, petroleum products, petrochemicals, the National Iranian Oil Company (“NIOC”), Naftiran Intertrade Company (“NICO”), or the Central Bank of Iran; providing underwriting services, insurance, or reinsurance for sanctionable activities with or involving Iran; or involving Iranian SDNs. The United States also added a record number of individuals and entities to the SDN List, including entities that had previously been granted sanctions relief under the JCPOA, Iranian government or financial entities transferred from the List of Persons Blocked Solely Pursuant to E.O. 13599 (the “E.O. 13599 List”), and 300 first-time designees.
November 5 also marked the end of the wind-down period for General License H, which had authorized non-U.S. entities owned or controlled by U.S.
persons to provide goods, services, or financing to Iranian entities under the terms of the JCPOA. The withdrawal of this authorization effectively subjected these non-U.S.
entities to the same limitations on engagement with Iran that restrict their U.S. parents.
This broad array of re-imposed restrictions does not, however, entirely prevent U.S. persons or non-U.S. persons from engaging in Iran-related transactions.
The Trump administration has provided sanctions waivers to eight countries that have pledged to significantly reduce their imports of Iranian crude oil, and has also purportedly waived sanctions for dealing with Iran’s Chabahar port—which is strategically important to the reconstruction of Afghanistan—and for certain nonproliferation efforts ongoing at several Iranian nuclear sites. Certain exceptions, including for transactions related to the Shah Deniz gas field (which is partly owned by the Government of Iran) and for transactions involving the export of agricultural commodities, food, medicine, or medical devices to Iran, also continue to apply. Additionally, General License D-1—which allows for the export of certain telecommunications goods and services to Iran—remains in force, as does General License J—which permits temporary visits to Iran by U.S.-origin aircraft (thus allowing international carriers to continue flying to Iran). Additionally, U.S. secondary sanctions do not apply to dealings with Iranian banks that are designated solely because of their status as “Iranian financial institutions” pursuant to Executive Order 13599, leaving certain payment channels open for otherwise permissible operations in Iran.
Parties vs. Entities
Lawtrac’s Parties/Entities module was created in order to associate individuals as well as groups to a specific matter.
The Parties function tracks individuals (internal or external) who have some relationship to a matter record while Entities are companies or groups (internal or external) with some relationship to a matter record.
The relationship to the matter may be as agent, adjuster, or other category set by your site administrator.
The following flowchart illustrates the differences between a party and an entity.
The traditional use of parties within a matter management system pertains mainly to individuals associated to a matter who are neither part of the corporate structure nor the outside counsel or vendors who also have a direct relationship to that matter.
If Bob Smith, the individual, is involved with a claim or litigation against your company, he might be a “Party” to the matter.
If Bob Smith is a corporation (Bob Smith, Inc.) involved with a claim or litigation against your company, that corporation would be associated to the matter as an Entity.
- If Bob Smith is the CEO of your company, he would not be identified as a Party but rather as a corporate “Key Personnel.”
- If he is involved with the matter in a position to gain financially for work or services performed, he would be an outside counsel or vendor.
- The traditional requirements of assigning Parties to a matter will continue to be a function within Lawtrac, but we have introduced a two-tier “hierarchy” system to the Parties: the first tier is referred to as “Entity”; the second tier is referred to as “Party”.
- Individual parties can be associated to a matter, and they can also be a part of an entity that is associated to another matter.
- An Entity can be:
- An external company
- A subordinate company within the corporation using the Lawtrac application
- An identified class of litigants
A Party can be:
- A subordinate individual to an Entity
- A subordinate individual to more than one Entity
- An individual who can be associated to a matter but who is not associated to an Entity
When an Entity is attached to a matter, subordinate Parties are also attached, making their contact information available to all those working on the matter.
Parties are attached to a matter as individuals. An individual who is subordinate to an Entity may be attached as an individual, at which point the association is one-to-one and will not involve the Entity or other subordinates of any associated Entity.
Any entity that is recognised as having privileges and obligations in law
“Business entity” redirects here. For the concept in computer science, see Business object. For types of business entities, see List of legal entity types by country.
|Management of a business|
Types of management
In law, a legal person is any person or 'thing' (less ambiguously, any legal entity) that can do the things an everyday person can usually do in law – such as enter into contracts, sue and be sued, own property, and so on.
The reason for the term “legal person” is that some legal persons are not people: companies and other corporations are “persons” legally speaking (they can legally do most of the things an ordinary person can do), but they are clearly not people in the ordinary sense.
There are therefore two kinds of legal entities: human and non-human. In law a human person is called a “natural person” (sometimes also a physical person), and a non-human person is called a juridical person (sometimes also a juridic, juristic, artificial, legal, or fictitious person, Latin: persona ficta).
Juridical persons are entities such as corporations, firms (in some jurisdictions), and many government agencies. They are treated in law as if they were persons.
While natural persons acquire legal personality “naturally”, simply by being born (or before that, in some jurisdictions), juridical persons must have legal personality conferred on them by some “unnatural”, legal process, and it is for this reason that they are sometimes called “artificial” persons. In the most common case, incorporating a business, legal personality is usually acquired by registration with a government agency set up for the purpose. In other cases it may be by primary legislation: an example is the Charity Commission in the UK.
As legal personality is a prerequisite to legal capacity (the ability of any legal person to amend (enter into, transfer, etc.) rights and obligations), it is a prerequisite for an international organization to be able to sign international treaties in its own name.
The term “legal person” can be ambiguous because it is often used as a synonym of terms that refer only to non-human legal entities, specifically in contradistinction to “natural person”.
Main article: Juridical person
Artificial personality, juridical personality, or juristic personality is the characteristic of a non-living entity regarded by law to have the status of personhood.
A juridical or artificial person (Latin: persona ficta; also juristic person) has a legal name and has certain rights, protections, privileges, responsibilities, and liabilities in law, similar to those of a natural person. The concept of a juridical person is a fundamental legal fiction. It is pertinent to the philosophy of law, as it is essential to laws affecting a corporation (corporations law).
Juridical personhood allows one or more natural persons (universitas personarum) to act as a single entity (body corporate) for legal purposes.
In many jurisdictions, artificial personality allows that entity to be considered under law separately from its individual members (for example in a company limited by shares, its shareholders). They may sue and be sued, enter contracts, incur debt, and own property.
Entities with legal personality may also be subjected to certain legal obligations, such as the payment of taxes. An entity with legal personality may shield its members from personal liability.
In some common law jurisdictions a distinction is drawn between corporation aggregate (such as a company, which is composed of a number of members) and a corporation sole, which is a public office of legal personality separated from the individual holding the office; (both entities have separate legal personality). Historically most corporations sole were ecclesiastical in nature (for example, the office of the Archbishop of Canterbury is a corporation sole), but a number of other public offices are now formed as corporations sole.
The concept of juridical personality is not absolute.
“Piercing the corporate veil” refers to looking at the individual natural persons acting as agents involved in a company action or decision; this may result in a legal decision in which the rights or duties of a corporation or public limited company are treated as the rights or liabilities of that corporation's members or directors.
The concept of a juridical person is now central to Western law in both common-law and civil-law countries, but it is also found in virtually every legal system.
Some examples of juridical persons include:
- Cooperatives (co-ops), business organization owned and democratically operated by a group of individuals for their mutual benefit
- Corporations are bodies corporate created by statute or charter. A corporation sole is a corporation constituted by a single member, in a particular capacity, and that person's successors in the same capacity, in order to give them some legal benefit or advantage, particularly that of perpetuity, which a natural person could not have had. Examples are a religious officiant in that capacity, or The Crown in the Commonwealth realms. A corporation aggregate is a corporation constituted by more than one member.
- Municipal corporations (municipalities) are “creatures of statute”. Other organizations may be created by statute as legal persons, including European economic interest groupings (EEIGs).
- Unincorporated associations, that is aggregates of two or more persons, are treated as juridical persons in some jurisdictions but not others.
- Partnerships, an aggregate of two or more persons to carry on a business in common for profit and created by agreement. Traditionally, partnerships did not have continuing legal personality, but many jurisdictions now treat them as having an independent legal personality.
- Companies, a form of business association that carries on an industrial enterprise, are often corporations, although companies may take other forms, such as trade unions, unlimited companies, trusts, and funds. Limited liability companies—be they a private company limited by guarantee, private company limited by shares, or public limited company—are entities having certain characteristics of both a corporation and a partnership. Different types have a complex variety of advantages and disadvantages.
- Sovereign states are legal persons.
- In the international legal system, various organizations possess legal personality. These include intergovernmental organizations (the United Nations, the Council of Europe) and some other international organizations (including the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, a religious order).
- The European Union (EU) has legal personality since the Lisbon Treaty entered into force on 1 December 2009. That the EU has legal personality is a prerequisite for the EU to join the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). However, in 2014, the EU decided not to be bound by the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights.
- Temples, in some legal systems, have separate legal personality.
- The Whanganui River was granted legal personality in March 2017 under New Zealand law because the Whanganui Māori tribe regard the river as their ancestor.
- Also, in March 2017, the High Court of Uttarakhand declared the Ganges River a legal “person” in a move that according to one newspaper, “could help in efforts to clean the pollution-choked rivers”. As of 6 April 2017, the ruling has been commented on in Indian newspapers to be hard to enforce, with assertions that experts[who?] do not anticipate immediate benefits, that the ruling is “hardly game changing”, that experts[who?
- The person or entity will not be reimbursed for any item or service they may furnish.
- The person or entity may neither personally, nor through a clinic, group, corporation, or other means, bill or otherwise request or receive payment for any Title V, XIX, or XX, or other HHS programs, or request or receive payment from the Medicaid program.
- The person or entity may not assess care, or order or prescribe services to Title V, XIX, or XX, or other HHS programs recipients. This applies regardless of whether the services were provided directly or indirectly. Also, a clinic, group, corporation, or other entity is not allowed to submit claims for any assessments, services, or items provided by a person who is excluded from participation.
- Any entity that employs, or otherwise associates with, an excluded person is not allowed to include within a cost report, or any other documents used to determine an individual payment rate, a statewide payment rate or a fee, the salary, fringe benefits, overhead, or any other costs associated with the person excluded.
- If a person who is later excluded has written an order or prescription before the exclusion date, the prescription remains valid for the duration of the order or prescription.
- If, after a person or entity is excluded, they submit claims for payment, we may assess administrative damages and penalties.
- Visualise EU Sanctions Map
- directly or indirectly making an asset available to (or for the benefit of) a designated person or entity; and
- an asset-holder using or dealing with an asset that is owned or controlled by a designated person or entity. As these assets cannot be used or dealt with, they are referred to as ‘frozen’.
- International shipment destinations
- sending or carrying equipment, biologicals, or controlled technical information overseas
- Visa applicants
- Foreign visitors
- International sponsors
- International travel destinations
- Faculty member receives a request to give a talk at a foreign university or institute (request screening beforetravel arrangements are made)
- An unsolicited request is received by a foreign national to tour a high technology facility (request screening beforeletter of invitation is sent).
- Items are being shipped to a foreign destination
The Office of Inspector General works to protect the health and welfare of people receiving Medicaid and other state benefits. To help protect these recipients, OIG may prevent certain people or businesses from participating as service providers. The people or businesses who are excluded from participating as providers are added to the Texas Exclusions List.
A person, or entity, may be excluded for many reasons. These include, but are not limited to:
Every service provider is responsible for making sure that no excluded individuals or entities are receiving state funds.
Specifically, it is each provider's or person's responsibility to ensure that items or services furnished personally by, at the medical direction of, or on the prescription or order of an excluded person are not billed to the Titles V (Maternal and Child Health Services), XIX (Medicaid), XX (Block Grants for Social Services), and/or other HHS programs after the effective date of exclusion. This section applies regardless of whether an excluded person has obtained a program provider number or equivalent, either as an individual or as a member of a group, prior to being reinstated.
When a person or entity is excluded from Medicaid, Title V, Title XX, and other HHS programs,
All service providers should check OIG's exclusion list monthly.
Consolidated list of persons, groups and entities subject to EU financial sanctions – European Union Open Data Portal
Is there any data you would like to find on the portal?
Make a suggestion
Service for Foreign Policy Instruments »
In its policy, the European Union intervenes when necessary to prevent conflict or in response to emerging or actual crises. In certain cases, EU intervention can take the form of restrictive measures or 'sanctions'.
The application of financial sanctions and more precisely the freezing of assets constitutes an obligation for both the public and private sector.
In this regard, a particular responsibility falls on credit and financial institutions, since they are involved in the bulk of financial transfers.
In order to facilitate the application of financial sanctions, the European Banking Federation, the European Savings Banks Group, the European Association of Co-operative Banks, the European Association of Public Banks (“the EU Credit Sector Federations”) and the European Commission recognised the need for an EU consolidated list of persons, groups and entities subject to financial sanctions and more precisely the freezing of assets. The Credit Sector Federations set up an initial database containing the consolidated list. The European Commission subsequently took over this database and is responsible for its maintenance and for keeping the consolidated list of sanctions up-to-date. In this respect, the Service for Foreign Policy Instruments (FPI) of the European Commission launched a new Web page in June 2017, where the consolidated lists of financial sanctions consisting in freezing of assets are published in different formats (see link below).
Disclaimer: While every effort is made to ensure that the database and the consolidated list correctly reproduce all relevant data of the officially adopted texts published in the Official Journal of the European Union, neither the Commission nor the EU Credit Sector Federations accepts any liability for possible omissions of relevant data or mistakes, and nor for any use the database or of the consolidated list. Only the information published in the Official Journal of the EU is deemed authentic.
International issues, Government and public sector
THE EU OPEN DATA PORTAL CARES ABOUT YOUR OPINION. TAKE A FEW MINUTES TO FILL THIS SURVEY AND HELP US TO IMPROVE OUR SERVICES.
You are not assigned to a publisher. Please contact an administrator.
Consolidated List | DFAT
The Consolidated List is a list of all persons and entities who are subject to targeted financial sanctions under Australian sanctions law. Those listed may be Australian citizens, foreign nationals, or residents in Australia or overseas.
You are responsible for undertaking the due diligence checks necessary to ensure the persons or entities connected with your proposed activity are not subject to targeted financial sanctions.
The Consolidated List is designed as one tool to assist you to undertake your due diligence checks.
You are also responsible for undertaking due diligence to ensure no asset is indirectly provided to any individual or entity on the Consolidated List.
ASO maintains the list and updates it regularly. You can subscribe to our email list to receive updates. The Consolidated List includes, where available, the name (including any alias), date and place of birth, and citizenship and address of listed persons and entities.
Why check the Consolidated List?
It is important you check the Consolidated List to ensure that you do not contravene Australian sanctions law by providing assets to, or dealing with the assets of, a listed person or entity. It is a serious criminal offence to contravene a sanctions measure. The penalties include up to ten years in prison for individuals and substantial fines for individuals and bodies corporate.
Targeted financial sanctions prohibit:
Know Which Countries, Entities, and Persons are Restricted
The U.S. Department of the Treasury, through its Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), enforces U.S. embargo and sanction programs that may restrict transactions with certain foreign countries irrespective of whether the exported technology is controlled under the ITAR or the EAR.
Sanctions programs vary in severity. In cases where a country is comprehensively embargoed, ALL transactions are prohibited with that country, including exporting to, importing from, financial transactions with, or providing services to.
Countries with comprehensive or extensive sanctions include Iran, Cuba, Sudan, Syria, and North Korea. The OFAC full list of current sanctions can be found on the OFAC website. Depending on the country’s embargo or sanctions program, certain activities may be prohibited without a government license.
The Department of State also maintains country level sanctions which can be found here.
In addition, OFAC along with the Department of Commerce and Department of State maintain lists of entities (including universities and institutes) and persons with whom interactions are prohibited.
These lists include the OFAC Specially Designated Nationals List, and the Commerce Department’s Entity List and Denied Persons List.
A Consolidated List is available which includes the aforementioned lists and several others.
To prevent transactions with restricted entities or persons, shipping destinations, travel destinations, visitors, and international collaborators should be screened against the restricted parties lists discussed above (Restricted Party Screening).
When is RPS necessary?
Any interactions with foreign persons or entities should undergo RPS. Examples include:
When is RPS done automatically and when do I need to request it?
Visa applicants going through the Office of International Students and Scholars (OISS) routinely undergo RPS. Material Transfer Agreements going through the Office of Technology Management (OTM) are also routinely screened.
If your transaction is not going through either of these offices please contact the Export Control Manager (ECM) at [email protected] to have restricted party screening conducted for you.
Examples of situations where RPS should be requested:
Can I check the lists myself?
Multiple lists maintained by multiple agencies make screening complex. There is a consolidated screening list search engine available online.
However the university has software which provides more comprehensive screening of these and additional lists as well as an audit trail. Please contact the ECM at [email protected]
edu for RPS assistance.
Export Controlled or Sanctioned Countries, Entities and Persons
Crimea Region of Ukraine, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria
Export Administration Regulations – EAR
Crimea Region of the Ukraine, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria
See Sanctions Program and Country Summaries and the EAR's Part 746 embargoes pages for more specific information.
Targeted Sanctions Countries
Office of Foreign Assets Control Regulations – OFAC
Burundi, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Libya, Lebanon, Sudan, South Sudan, Somalia, Belarus, Iraq, Yemen, Russia/Ukraine, Zimbabwe, Balkans, Venezuela
Export Administration Regulations – EAR
See Sanctions Program and Country Summaries and the EAR's Part 746 embargoes pages for more specific information.
Countries with Restricted Parties on the EAR Entity List
China, Canada, Germany, Iran, India, Israel, Pakistan, Russia, Egypt, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Kuwait, Lebanon, Singapore, South Korea, Syria, United Arab Emirates the United Kingdom.
International Traffic in Arms Regulations – ITAR Prohibited Countries
Afghanistan, Belarus, Central African Republic, Cuba, Cyprus, Eritrea, Fiji, Iran, Iraq, Cote d'Ivoire, Lebanon, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Vietnam, Myanmar, China, Haiti, Liberia, Rwanda, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Republic of the Sudan (Northern Sudan), Yemen, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Democratic Republic of the Congo.