Offshore Litigation

Blog

Offshore Litigation

Contributors

Jonathan Addo
Jonathan Addo
  • Jonathan Addo

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Jeremy Child
Jeremy Child
  • Jeremy Child

  • Partner
  • London
Julie Engwirda
Julie Engwirda
  • Julie Engwirda

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Peter Ferrer
Peter Ferrer
  • Peter Ferrer

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Claire Goldstein
Claire Goldstein
  • Claire Goldstein

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Hazel-Ann Hannaway
Hazel-Ann Hannaway
  • Hazel-Ann Hannaway

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Nick Hoffman
Nick Hoffman
  • Nick Hoffman

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Andrew Johnstone
Andrew Johnstone
  • Andrew Johnstone

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Paula Kay
Paula Kay
  • Paula Kay

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Phillip Kite
Phillip Kite
  • Phillip Kite

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Vicky Lord
Vicky Lord
  • Vicky Lord

  • Partner
  • Shanghai
Paul Madden
Paul Madden
  • Paul Madden

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Henry Mander
Henry Mander
  • Henry Mander

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Ian Mann
Ian Mann
  • Ian Mann

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
William Peake
William Peake
  • William Peake

  • Partner
  • London
Lorinda Peasland
Lorinda Peasland
  • Lorinda Peasland

  • Consultant
  • Hong Kong
Chai Ridgers
Chai Ridgers
  • Chai Ridgers

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Nicola Roberts
Nicola Roberts
  • Nicola Roberts

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
  • Singapore
Paul Smith
Paul Smith
  • Paul Smith

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Andrew Thorp
Andrew Thorp
  • Andrew Thorp

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Jessica Williams
Jessica Williams
  • Jessica Williams

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Jayson Wood
Jayson Wood
  • Jayson Wood

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands

Re ICGI - the high bar for the appointment of provisional liquidators

In a recent decision of the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands (Re ICG I), Justice Doyle dismissed an application by a contributory for the appointment of joint provisional liquidators (JPLs) pursuant to section 104(2) of the Companies Act.  

The judge held that the appointment of receivers over the company, on the same day as the application was heard, was a sufficient safeguard against any dissipation of assets or further mismanagement by the directors pending the determination of the winding-up petition. The judgment confirms that the appointment of JPLs is a “serious step” and applicants for such orders have to satisfy a “heavy and onerous burden”.

Justice Doyle summarised the four conditions which an applicant must meet to justify appointing JPLs:

  • A winding-up petition has been presented but a winding-up order has not yet been made;
  • The applicant has standing to make the application (ie a creditor, contributory or Authority);
  • There is a prima facie case for making a winding-up order; and
  • The appointment of the provisional liquidator is necessary to prevent the dissipation or misuse of the company’s assets and/or the oppression of minority shareholders and/or the mismanagement or misconduct on the part of the company’s directors (the necessity test).

The application turned on the applicant’s failure to overcome the necessity test. Notwithstanding that Justice Doyle found that the applicant demonstrated serious concerns over the activities of the director and the alleged shadow director of the company, Justice Doyle was persuaded that the appointment of Deloitte as receivers over the shares in the company and Deloitte’s appointment of an independent director, which replaced the board of directors, were sufficient to secure the company’s assets (being properties in Japan) from dissipation, future mismanagement or misconduct. Justice Doyle also considered that a Japanese seizure order over the properties in respect of unpaid taxes was another safeguard against the disposal of the assets. If necessary, the applicant could consider applying for an injunction in Japan to further safeguard the assets.

This judgment is a timely reminder that the appointment of JPLs is considered to be a draconian remedy which will not be granted lightly. Practitioners should first exhaust potential alternatives to safeguard a company’s assets from dissipation or management before seeking the appointment of JPLs. Evidence that alternative remedies to preserve assets from dissipation or misconduct by errant directors is necessary before applying for JPLs.

Re ICGI - the high bar for the appointment of provisional liquidators

Leave A Comment