Retrieved 17 August 2026 from finance.ec.europa.eu, HTTP 200, four pages
Claims
CH6 that EU law permits Syrian payments and SWIFT messaging; the delistings; the no-claims rule
Status
READ
Version history
The register keeps changing after the book is fixed in print. Each entry below was added to this row in the order shown.
READ 17 August 2026 across all four pages, at about the first 2,600 characters of each, so the tail of pages 2 to 4 is not read and is reading owed. QUESTION 12 IS THE ANSWER TO THE CHAPTER'S SWIFT QUESTION ON THE PERMISSION LEG: 'There are no restrictions on the use of specialised financial messaging services in the EU's sanctions concerning Syria.' Question 6: payments to and from Syria are generally permitted and EU sanctions do not prohibit EU banks from processing them or from transacting with Syrian banks, subject to listed persons, listed institutions, restricted goods and AML/CFT obligations. Question 4: 29 entities delisted including the Central Bank of Syria. Question 11: the EU does not recognise the extraterritorial application of third country law. Question 7: no prohibition on IFI financing, EIB and EBRD named. The last page records that a Syrian or formerly listed person cannot claim damages after 28 May 2025 for non-performance while a restriction was in force. THE FAQ DATES THE LIFTING TO 28 MAY 2025 AND SRC-178's OWN ARTICLE 2 MAKES IT 29 MAY; see SRC-178.
READ IN FULL 17 August 2026, all four pages and all fifteen questions, so the earlier note that the tail was unread is DISCHARGED. The tail adds two things the chapter needs. Q14: there are no restrictions on importing handcraft, agricultural, forestry and fishing products from Syria, nor on the transport and financial services related to them, provided the goods are not purchased from listed persons. Q15 IS A RECONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FACT: 'Sanctions prevail over contractual agreements. Hence, contracts between EU and Syrian operators that were at odds with supervening sanctions could not and should not be performed. EU operators were shielded from legal consequence for non-performance of such contracts under Article 27 of Council Regulation 36/2012.' Read with the no-claims rule already recorded above, the position is that non-performance during the sanctions period is protected on the EU side and unclaimable from the Syrian side.