Offshore Litigation Blog

In the course of complex contested succession proceedings in the case of ATH v BNU, Justice Mithani gave an (anonymised) judgment dated 10 July 2025 in the BVI High Court. This is an important judgment of particular significance to practitioners dealing with estates pending a full grant of administration.

In Stevens v Hotel Portfolio II UK Ltd (HPII), a judgment handed down by the Supreme Court on 23 July 2025, Lord Briggs gave the leading judgment (with only Lord Burrows dissenting), providing a clear statement of the law on compensation for breach of constructive trust by a trustee and a dishonest assistant.

In Commercial Bank of Dubai PSC v Al Sari, the English Commercial Court granted a declaration sought by the Bank that a United Arab Emirates Court judgment in favour of the defendants was obtained by fraud. The decision also clarifies that the rule in House of Spring Gardens v Waite (No 2) does not apply to enforcement proceedings, such that a party is not precluded from re-litigating the issue of fraud in a domestic court where the same issue had been dismissed in the foreign court.

In Jardine Strategic Limited v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd the Privy Council (on appeal from the Court of Appeal for Bermuda) held that shareholders who acquired their shares after the date of notice of the meeting at which a proposed amalgamation would be voted on, and with knowledge that the proposed amalgamation would be approved and implemented, had standing to pursue fair value appraisal proceedings under section 106 of the Companies Act 1981 of Bermuda.

In the recent English case of Waypark Commercial Mortgage Ltd v Vanguard Number 1 Ltd (In Liquidation), the Court had to consider whether the sale of property by a secured creditor of a company in liquidation was impacted by the automatic stay imposed by section 130(2) of the English Insolvency Act, 1986.

The Grand Court of the Cayman Islands has consistently favoured providing assistance to foreign courts to the fullest extent possible. This has again been demonstrated in the recent decision in Shen v Inspire Inc (No 2).

This article examines how the ‘immovables rule’ intersects with the practice of modern cross-border insolvency under English common law.

The Gerald Metals Group was awarded an unprecedented $2.5 million fine against its former joint venture partner China National Gold Group Hong Kong Limited (CNG) for its significant and persistent non-compliance with court orders in the BVI.

Over the past decade, the Hong Kong courts have given multiple important judgments concerning their power to wind up foreign companies. In a recent judgment, the Court of Appeal provided important clarification regarding a key element of this power.

One of the fundamental difficulties that arises with crypto recovery claims is that the wrongdoers responsible for the misappropriation will (at least at the outset) almost always be unknown. That difficulty is (or may be) compounded in circumstances where different people or categories of people: (i) are responsible for the initial wrongdoing, eg a hack or scam; (ii) receive the misappropriated assets pursuant to the wrongdoing; and (iii) have received the misappropriated assets through subsequent transfers (whether in the knowledge of the misappropriation or not).

The English High Court recently handed down judgment in Caxton International Ltd v Essity Aktiebolag (Publ), in which Mr Justice Fancourt held that the Claimants not being parties to the subject notes was no bar to seeking declaratory relief that an event of default had occurred under such notes.

Over the past couple of weeks, key players in the financial services world converged on the shores of the British Virgin Islands for two globally significant conferences: INSOL BVI Seminar and Fintech on the Seas (FOTS). The BVI relished its opportunity to play host, showcasing the sophistication of its financial services sector and legal market to an elite global audience.