Svarog Shipping & Trading Company Limited, commonly referred to as Svarog, was fined £5,000 by the UK government on April 11, 2025. The Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI), a division of HM Treasury, imposed penalties on this UK-registered business. The fine was issued under the Policing and Crime Act 2017.
Svarog was punished because it did not reply in time to an official request from OFSI. The request was made as part of a sanctions investigation related to Russia. Under the law, when a company receives such a request, it is required to respond by a certain date unless it has a good reason not to. Svarog failed to do this.
The company was given a chance to respond to OFSI’s intention to fine them. They could have provided an explanation or asked for a review. However, Svarog did not reply to OFSI’s warning and did not challenge the decision. As a result, the penalty became official without any objections.
Why Svarog Was Investigated
Svarog operates in the maritime oil transport business. While the company is based in the UK, its main operations take place in Cyprus. The investigation started after OFSI issued a general licence in March 2022. This licence was meant to help companies wind down business dealings with Sovcomflot, a company affected by UK sanctions related to Russia.
Svarog came into focus during a larger investigation into dealings with Sovcomflot and its subsidiaries. OFSI discovered that Svarog had done business with one of Sovcomflot’s smaller companies. Because of this, OFSI wanted more information and sent Svarog a formal request on January 26, 2024. The email asked specific questions and gave a deadline of February 9, 2024 for a response.
Six Ships, $33 Million, and a Nuclear Threat: U.S. Unmasks North Korea’s Sanctions Evasion Plot
Svarog did not reply by that date. Despite several reminders, the company remained silent. Eventually, OFSI had to contact Svarog’s auditors. Only then did Svarog respond. Although the company said sorry for the delay, it did not give a good reason for missing the deadline. OFSI decided that this was not acceptable.
Svarog was found to have breached regulation 74(1)(a) of the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019. This regulation states that it is a criminal offence to fail to respond to a request for information without a reasonable excuse.
Why the Fine Was Given
When deciding whether to issue a penalty, OFSI looks at how serious the situation is. In Svarog’s case, several facts made the offence more serious.
Svarog knew that OFSI was going to send a request and had confirmed the email address where it would be received. Yet the company did not make sure someone was checking that email or responding to it. OFSI said this showed a lack of care and responsibility.
Because Svarog works in oil shipping, an industry that often deals with sanctions, the company should have been more alert. Businesses in high-risk areas are expected to act carefully and follow rules more strictly. OFSI noted that Svarog had some awareness of the risks but did not act accordingly when it mattered.
U.S. Accuses Russia of Sabotaging UN Sanctions to Fuel War With North Korea’s Missiles
Svarog also failed to share important information in a timely way. The delay made OFSI’s job harder. Time and resources were wasted, including the need to contact the company’s auditors just to get a response. OFSI explained that delays like this can hurt their ability to carry out investigations and enforce sanctions across other cases.
Although the harm from this particular delay was not major, it still created extra work. OFSI stated that if more companies behaved this way, it could slow down their overall enforcement efforts. This is why OFSI treated the case as serious and issued a fine.
The penalty of £5,000 was described as fair and proportionate. OFSI also said that making the case public would help other businesses understand the importance of responding quickly to official requests.
Svarog was not accused of breaking any other sanctions rules. But failing to respond on time, especially without giving a valid reason, was enough to be considered a criminal offence. OFSI stressed that companies must take these responsibilities seriously. Even one missed deadline can lead to penalties and public naming.
You can read the full case on OFSI’s website: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/681c69ff3f1c73824ee3e56e/Publication_Notice_-_Svarog.pdf
