The European Union's stance on the extraterritorial reach of its sanctions has evolved recently, particularly in response to the need to prevent circumvention of restrictive measures against Russia. This article examines the legal basis and challenges associated with the "Best Efforts" obligation and the "No Re-export clause". While these provisions impose contractual and compliance obligations on EU-based companies, they also raise questions about their extraterritorial enforcement, legal consistency, and the potential for legal challenges before EU and international courts. By analyzing the intersection between EU sanctions laws, international jurisdiction principles, and corporate liability, this article explores how these new measures might be challenged and what legal arguments could be used to contest their enforcement beyond EU borders.

European Union ("EU") sanctions compliance has gone global. Since the beginning of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the EU has continuously expanded the substantive and geographic reach of its restrictive measures in innovative and unprecedented ways. Among these latest innovations is a requirement, now enshrined in several EU sanctions regulations concerning Russia and Belarus, for legal and natural persons subject to EU law ("EU operators") to undertake their best efforts to ensure that any entity that they own or control outside the EU do not undermine EU sanctions against Russia and Belarus. This obligation is commonly referred to as the "best efforts" clause or requirement. 

The EU has introduced explicit compliance obligations in its 14th Russia sanctions package, marking a shift from just prohibiting certain economic activities to also mandating how businesses must ensure compliance. Previously, operators had to adhere to sanctions but were not given clear regulatory requirements on implementation within the regulations. The evolving framework extends beyond sanctions regulations to broader EU legislation, including anti-money laundering (AML), instant payments, and crypto-asset transactions. This fragmented approach risks resulting in overlapping yet incomplete obligations, uncertainty, and administrative complexity. Financial institutions face multiple layers of compliance rules, while other sectors remain underregulated. The article examines these regulatory developments, their scope and their impact on businesses. To improve enforcement and prevent circumvention, a more unified EU compliance framework is necessary. A risk-based, harmonised approach would reduce inconsistencies, enhance clarity for businesses, and ensure sanctions are more effective in practice.