Cayman Islands Sanctions Update: Switching to the UK Sanctions List

Published: 2 Feb 2026

The Cayman Islands Financial Reporting Authority (FRA) has issued a Public Notice confirming that, in line with previous announcements issued by the UK Government, the UK Sanctions List is now the only official list detailing all sanctions designations published by the UK Government.

The UK Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) Consolidated List of Asset Freeze Targets and its search tool are now effectively closed and will no longer be maintained (but the OFSI Consolidated List will remain available for reference).

No changes have been made to the structure of the UK Sanctions List (UKSL).

Primary Contact

Martin Byers

Partner
Cayman Islands

T +1 345 814 2004
E [email protected]

Martin Byers, Simon Raftopoulos, Maree Martin, Menelik Miller, Miriam Smyth

WHAT IS THE UK SANCTIONS LIST?

The UKSL has been the principal list of sanctions designations made under the UK Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act (SAMLA) since it launched in 2020 and essentially provides a comprehensive list of persons subject to sanctions pursuant to UK regulations made under SAMLA – including financial, trade, immigration and transport sanctions. The UKSL is broader therefore than the OFSI Consolidated List, which had only included information on persons subject to UK financial sanctions.

Sanctions currently in force in the Cayman Islands reflect those imposed in the UK; and it is UK Government policy to ensure that British Overseas Territories such as the Cayman Islands are legally and practically enabled to implement all sanctions designations that are adopted by the UK.

MOVING TO A SINGLE LIST FOR UK SANCTIONS DESIGNATIONS

The UK’s cross-government review of sanctions implementation and enforcement announced, in May 2025, that the UK would be moving to a single list for all UK sanctions designations noting that this shift is responsive to industry feedback to the effect that a single list could remove duplication of effort and simplify checks and screening processes in respect of persons subject to UK sanctions.

As of 28 January 2026, the UKSL became the only official sanctions list that details sanctions designations published by the UK Government. The OFSI Consolidated List and its associated search tool are no longer maintained or updated.

OTHER KEY CHANGES

The UKSL search tool has been enhanced to implement a ‘fuzzy logic’ search function and rank search results by relevance.
The ‘Russia: List of persons named in relation to financial and investment restrictions’ is now hosted on a discrete webpage featuring a simplified table (and has not been merged into the UKSL).
A new set of discrete UK sanctions regime webpages (accessible via the Current UK Sanctions Regimes webpage) have been introduced to host sanctions notices.
A general Guidance webpage has been made available to help industry use the UKSL as a single source for UK sanctions designations.

RESPONDING TO AND MANAGING THE CHANGE

Sanctions Screening

Any systems that use the OFSI Consolidated List for sanctions screening purposes should be updated to instead use data from the UKSL; and any systems that use an ‘OFSI Group ID’ as an identifier should be updated to instead use the UKSL’s ‘Unique ID’ for new designated persons.

Any Cayman Islands person(s) using a third-party sanctions screening provider are encouraged to speak with such provider in order to ensure that any and all data used for Cayman-compliant screening will incorporate and reflect the relevant data in the UKSL.

Sanctions Licensing and Reporting

All UKSL formats will retain ‘OFSI Group ID’ identifiers for sanctioned persons that were designated as such prior to 28 January 2026; and these historic ‘OFSI Group IDs’ will remain valid for use in sanctions licence applications and/or frozen asset or suspected breach reporting (noting that the new UKSL ‘Unique IDs’ will also be valid for use in this respect).

Ongoing Monitoring

In terms of key broader continuing obligations under the Cayman Islands sanctions and AML/CFT/CPF regimes, any relevant ongoing monitoring and/or searches carried out by Cayman Islands persons in respect of their clients and/or counterparties (as appropriate) should be conducted by reference to the UKSL; and any associated compliance policies and procedures should be reviewed and updated (if required) to reflect the same.

HOW WE CAN HELP

It is important that all Cayman Islands persons understand and act appropriately upon the effective closure of the OFSI Consolidated List and the establishment of the UKSL as the only official source for UK sanctions designations.

Appleby’s Regulatory Team has extensive experience advising on international financial and trade sanctions and their impact on Cayman Islands entities – including in relation to sanctions screening, the implementation and reporting of asset freezes, sanctions licensing, and related matters.

For further information on or assistance with any of the matters referred to in this briefing please reach out to one of the Key Contacts listed below or to your usual Appleby point of contact.

More publications

7 Aug 2026

New CIMA Rules on AML/CFT/CPF Compliance and Financial Sanctions Issued in the Cayman Islands

On 20 July 2026, further to an industry consultation, the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (CIMA) published the following two new Rules set to introduce binding risk management, governance, sanctions screening and other compliance requirements for regulated financial service providers in the Cayman Islands: (i) Rule on Effective Compliance Programmes for the Prevention and Detection of Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Proliferation Financing for Financial Services Providers (AML Rule); and (ii) Rule on Compliance with Financial Sanctions and Targeted Financial Sanctions (Sanctions Rule and, together with the AML Rule, the Rules). All CIMA-regulated financial services providers, including investment funds, insurers and reinsurers that are conducting ‘relevant financial business’ as defined under the Proceeds of Crime Act (Revised) (POCA) (FSP), are encouraged to review and update their documented framework of AML/CFT/CPF and sanctions compliance policies, procedures, controls, oversight and reporting mechanisms (Compliance Programmes) to ensure compliance with the Rules by the time they come into force on 18 September 2026.

Martin Byers, Maree Martin, Miriam Smyth, Menelik Miller

6 Aug 2026

The Rights of Sanctioned Litigants to access to the Court: Court of Appeal issues Key Decision in the BVI

The Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal has delivered a significant judgment in AO Alfa-Bank v Kipford Ventures Limited, overturning a stay of proceedings and reinstating a US$142 million freezing injunction. The decision provides important guidance on access to justice, sanctions, and interim relief in the BVI.

Andrew Willins, KC, Tamara Cameron

JPLs, Directors and Arbitration: Grand Court Clarifies the Scope of Provisional Liquidators' Powers

5 Aug 2026

Good faith in action, not just belief: the UK Supreme Court’s decision in Saxon Woods Investments Limited v Costa and its significance in the Cayman Islands

May a company director depart from a strategy his board has agreed, in the sincere belief that he knows a better route to the company’s success? In Saxon Woods Investments Limited v Costa [2026] UKSC 21, the Supreme Court held that, whatever the answer, a director cannot pursue his own strategy by concealing it from, and misleading, his fellow directors. The Court confirmed that the good faith duty is not confined to a director’s sincerely held view of the company’s best interests; it also governs the means by which the director acts. The decision is an authoritative statement of the content of the fiduciary duty of loyalty, and is likely to be influential in the Cayman Islands. The decision will interest directors, those who advise or appoint them, and stakeholders affected by directors’ conduct.

Alan Bercow, Daniel Coelho

30 Jul 2026

Contingent Creditors, Standing And The Winding Up Jurisdiction: Analysing Re Petrosaudi International

The Cayman Islands Court of Appeal has delivered a highly significant judgment in Re PetroSaudi International.[1] The Court clarified the circumstances in which an alleged contingent creditor will have standing to petition to wind up a company under section 94(1)(b) of the Companies Act, and confirmed that there is no jurisdiction to make a winding up order on an ex parte without notice basis.[2] Our article analyses the Court of Appeal’s decision, and considers its implications for insolvency practitioners.

Harriet Ter-Berg, William Spence

30 Jul 2026

Final Means Final: Wei v Wang and the Common Law Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in the Cayman Islands

English Court Reaffirms Pro-Enforcement Approach to Foreign Judgments In Wei v Wang [2026] EWHC 1892 (Comm), the Court confirmed that exceptional avenues of review do not undermine the finality of a judgment and reiterated the limited scope of the natural justice defence.

Alan Bercow, Zuhair Farouki

28 Jul 2026

Drelle Overturned in Latest UK Supreme Court Decision

The United Kingdom Supreme Court in its recent decision in Drelle v Servis-Terminal LLC [2026] UKSC 29 (Drelle SC) has overturned the controversial decision of the English Court of Appeal in Servis-Terminal LLC v Drelle [2025] EWCA Civ 62 (Drelle CA), and in doing so has provided welcome clarity on the effect of unrecognised foreign judgments in cross-border bankruptcy and insolvency contexts. This is likely to have a wide-reaching impact – not only in the UK but also offshore – and particularly in the British Virgin Islands following the recent decision in JJW Hotels & Resorts Holding Inc v Rhodes (BVIHCM2025/0296) (JJW Hotels) (which relied heavily on Drelle CA), and in the Cayman Islands where previous authorities had recognised the ability, in the corporate context, for petitioners to present winding up petitions on the basis of an unrecognised foreign judgment.

Daniel Mitchell, Harriet Ter-Berg, Jae Shin

28 Jul 2026

Bermuda’s digital asset foresight bearing fruit

The wisdom of Bermuda’s pioneering approach in the digital asset business space has been underlined by the latest global economic impact figures compiled by McKinsey & Company, the global management consulting firm.

George McCallum

24 Jul 2026

Thalassa Investments LP: Section 22 and Specific Discovery - Strategic Considerations for Limited Partners Seeking Information and Documents

In Thalassa Investments LP [2026] CIGC (FSD) 32, the Grand Court refused an application by limited partner petitioners for specific discovery from the general partner in just and equitable proceedings to wind up a Cayman Islands ELP. The ruling was against the backdrop of serious lack of probity allegations made against the general partner by the petitioners. Notwithstanding those allegations, the Grand Court declined to make orders requiring discovery of various categories of documents to be used at trial. The ruling brings into focus the multiple routes potentially open to limited partners seeking information and/or documents from an ELP where there are allegations of mismanagement by the general partner. The limited partner may issue substantive proceedings (or, as in this case, present a just and equitable winding up petition) against the general partner and partnership, and then obtain documents through the usual discovery process. Alternatively, the limited partner may pursue its substantive right to true and full information under section 22 of the Exempted Limited Partnership Act first in order to help inform the bringing of a substantive claim, as was the approach in the Neoma (Abraaj) and the Port Fund litigation. Thalassa illustrates that the nature of the information sought, who holds it, and the legal basis on which disclosure is sought are all highly relevant to the outcome. The decision also highlights that section 22 and discovery serve different purposes, are governed by different legal tests and can produce different outcomes. The strategic question is not whether section 22 or the discovery process may be preferable in the abstract, but which legal framework best aligns with the limited partner’s objectives and the nature of the information sought.

Susan Fallan, Daniel Coelho, Hannah Oh

17 Jul 2026

Where foreign law governs international transactions: Key impact and considerations for Mauritian parties

We live in an era where the world’s economies, populations and cultures are growing interdependently thanks to cross border transactions and Mauritius, as an international financial centre holds an important position in the arena. We pride ourselves in the hybrid legal system that is in place constituting of a blending of both common law and civil law. Such legacy allows us to participate in international transactions, whether in the context of financings, mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures or commercial contracts, without much difficulty. It is therefore common for Mauritian entities to enter into agreements governed by foreign laws. One of the key clauses to the agreements governing these cross-border transactions is the choice of law and the agreed forum for dispute resolutions. This article explores the extent to which a Mauritian party can submit itself to the foreign laws governing international transactions.