LIECHTENSTEIN Trends and Developments Contributed by: Lukas-Florian Gilhofer and Mathias Bitschnau, Ospelt & Partner Attorneys at Law Ltd
its international obligations seriously and is not a juris - diction of convenience. The issue of orphaned legal entities is by no means resolved. The number of governing-body-less struc - tures remains high, regulatory solutions are in some cases still at the examination stage, and for the benefi - cial owners and beneficiaries concerned, the incapac - ity of their legal entities represents an ongoing and, in some cases, existential burden. In constellations of this kind, sanctions frequently do not strike the individuals they were originally intended to target, but rather downstream beneficiaries or uninvolved third parties who have no direct connection to the political purpose underlying the sanctions. Room for manoeuvre in individual cases From a practical perspective, a critical insight is that not every orphaned legal entity must necessarily remain orphaned. The dividing line between a legal entity that must be wound down by reason of a direct sanctions nexus and one that has merely become governing-body-less as a result of excessive caution is frequently unclear – but it is precisely for that reason that genuine room for manoeuvre exists. Through a
thorough legal analysis of the specific case, targeted communication with the FMA and – where necessary – direct dialogue with foreign sanctions authorities, it is in many cases possible to identify paths that: • restore the operational capacity of affected struc - tures; • allow assets to be administered in an orderly man- ner; and • safeguard the interests of beneficial owners on a lasting basis. The reintegration of orphaned legal entities into the active legal system is therefore not a mere admin - istrative exercise but a demanding advisory task. It requires in-depth knowledge of Liechtenstein com - pany and foundation law and of international sanc - tions law, as well as a well-established network of relationships with supervisory authorities and foreign legal experts. For those affected, this means that qualified advice – advice that examines the individual case closely, makes full use of the available regulatory latitude and actively seeks dialogue with all relevant authorities – can make the difference between lasting paralysis and the orderly restoration of legal capacity.
205 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook