Go to content
${facet.Name} (${facet.TotalResults})
${item.Icon}
${ item.ShortDescription }
${ item.SearchLabel?.ViewModel?.Label }
See all results
${facet.Name} (${facet.TotalResults})
${item.Icon}
${ item.ShortDescription }
${ item.SearchLabel?.ViewModel?.Label }
See all results

Offshore Litigation Blog

Knight chess piece on a 2x2 board

${totalItems} results

${customFilterHeading} Showing ${showingItems} of ${totalItems} results ${searchTerm}
${facet.Name} (${facet.TotalResults})
Reset
Dissenting Members’ Rights in the British Virgin Islands
The BVI Business Companies Act 2004 (the BCA) provides a remedy for members who dissent from proposed actions by the company in the form of a statutory right to have their shares bought out by the company for fair value.
BVI athletes in Paris goldrush
On 23 August 2023 in the early afternoon heat, the British Virgin Islands came to a complete standstill. Half a world away in Budapest, the BVI’s Kyron McMaster crouched in his lane waiting for the starting gun to fire in the 400m hurdles. 47.34 seconds later the small island nation exploded into delirium as McMaster won the BVI’s first ever World Championship medal, silver to follow up his consecutive gold medals at the 2018 and 2022 Commonwealth Games.
No benefits from your own wrongdoing: Mackay v Dick principle confirmed by the EWCA
The recent decision of the England and Wales Court of Appeal in King Crude Carriers SA & Ors v Ridgebury November LLC & Ors confirms the acceptance of the “Mackay v Dick” principle as a matter of English Law.
Beware the “non petition” clause
In the recent decision of In the Matter of Tyr Capital Partners SPC Ltd, the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands considered an application by Tyr Capital Partners SPC Ltd (the Fund) seeking an order that a winding up petition issued by TGT GP (the Petitioner) against the Fund be struck out pursuant to section 95(2) of the Companies Act (2023 Revision) which provides that where a petitioner is contractually bound not to present a winding-up petition, the court shall dismiss or adjourn the hearing of the petition.
Trustee de son tort or not? Trust instrument invalidated ex tunc or ex nunc? BVI Court gives decisive answers to both questions
In a welcome decision of the BVI Commercial Court in its recent decision in the case of Ieremeieva v Estera Corporate Services (BVI) Limited, the court considered and clarified the positions as a matter of BVI law on (i) the requirements for establishing a person as a trustee de son tort and (ii) the reference date in determining whether an invalidated trust instrument is to be treated as invalidated ex tunc (from the date that it was executed) or ex nunc (from the date on which it was invalidated).
Cayman Court relieves law firm from its undertaking when “caught between the Devil and the deep blue sea”
In a recent decision of the Financial Services Division of the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands (In the matter of a trust in favour of Lorenz and Lorenz), Justice Kawaley directed pursuant to section 48 of the Trusts Act (2021 Revision) that the applicant law firm could pay funds it had been holding on trust into court under section 69 of the Act, after indemnifying itself for its costs.
Validation vindication: transfer of shares after presentation of winding up petitions
In a recent decision of the Hong Kong Court of First Instance in In the Matter of Dexin China Holdings Company Ltd, the Court considered an application for a validation order in respect of the transfer of shares in a Cayman company listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange facing a winding up petition (the Petition) in Hong Kong based on an unsatisfied statutory demand.
Breaking news: Salford Estates overturned
The Privy Council has reversed years of settled law on the interplay between insolvency and arbitration proceedings.
Does it have sharp teeth? Breadth of ancillary disclosure orders - Al Saud v Gibbs
It is widely accepted in the BVI, Cayman Islands and Bermuda courts, as well as other common law jurisdictions, that an asset disclosure order is an ancillary order which gives a freezing injunction “its teeth” and the purpose for which they are made is to police that freezing order. But how is the court persuaded to bite?
${ item.Title }
${ item.Description }