That's when one panelist interrupted the webcast to announce that even as they spoke, Switzerland had announced it was breaking its traditional neutrality and joining with the European Union's sanctions by freezing billions of dollars in Russian assets held in Swiss banks.
One thing all corporate lawyers are facing is the sheer weight, speed and volume of the evolving sanctions, said Brez, a Kirkland litigation partner based in New York.
"We are sanctions lawyers," he said, "and it's a breathtaking pace for us. I can't imagine what it's like [for you]."
He was joined by Mario Mancuso, a partner and head of the firm's international trade and national security practice in Washington, D.C., and Marcus Thompson, a litigation partner based in London.
Mancuso noted that the U.S., U.K., European Union, Canada, Japan and other countries have generally aligned themselves in sanctioning Russia for its invasion of Ukraine, but each country's sanctions can be different, complicating compliance.
"As circumstances on the ground change, sanctions can change," Mancuso said. "So compliance obligations can quickly change. We've seen that — what a difference a week makes."
The panelists said early in-house conversations usually centered on the safety of colleagues abroad, but that increasing sanctions have forced global companies to look at other impacts now, especially in the directly affected finance, defense and technology sectors.
"If you have operations and sales in Ukraine, you can expect significant issues with your supply chain," Thompson said. "And if you have business in Russia, then there is an unprecedented wave of new sanctions against companies, banks and individuals which will make doing business in Russia very much harder than it was a week ago."
He offered a three-part framework, starting with assessing a company's exposure to business in the Ukraine and Russia.
"The reason is partly legal and partly commercial," Thompson explained. "Because if you are doing business with a company or a joint business partner in Russia and they find themselves on [a government sanctions] list, if you haven't taken steps to check who they are, then your business can incur legal liability."
He urged counsel to put such parties through a sanctions screen — an automated search of various government lists of sanctioned countries and individuals.
Then the company needs to take steps to extricate itself from any risky relationships. Because of the rapid changes over the past week, government prosecutors might give some leeway for a little while, Thompson said.
But that leeway "won't carry on forever," he warned.
"If you continue to not do any sanctions screening, you are asking for trouble."
The second part of the framework also involves looking at the short-term effect on pending relationships. Thompson said he's been receiving calls from clients who are on the cusp of a merger, acquisition or divestment and aren't sure whether to proceed.
He said he's also hearing from clients about to make significant purchases or sales with Russia, noting that they need to consider the practical issue of moving goods into or out of the country since its supply chain is restricted.
Another key issue is how payments will be made, he added, since Russia's banks are restricted and other funds are being frozen.
The third part is to weigh the risks of continuing to do business there due to the general complexity as well as political considerations. Some companies, like BP and Shell, have taken the approach that they will no longer do business with Russia.
Everyone is grappling with the complexity, and it is likely to take months or even years to answer all the questions, Thompson noted.
"So don't beat yourself up if you get it wrong at this stage," he said.
--Editing by Alanna Weissman and Kelly Duncan.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
