Offshore Litigation Blog

In a recent decision of the Privy Council in FamilyMart China Holding Co Ltd v Ting Chuan (Cayman Islands) Holding, on appeal from the Cayman Islands, the effect of an arbitration clause on the court’s jurisdiction to wind up on the just and equitable ground was considered.

The BVI has taken significant steps in the last decade to develop and promote its role in international arbitration. The BVI Arbitration Act (the Act), which is modelled on the UNCITRAL Model Law, came into force on 1 October 2014. In November 2016, the BVI International Arbitration Centre opened its doors with its rules based on 2010 UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. It is a modern and technologically effective framework that was well prepared for the remote hearing requirements necessitated by the Covid-19 pandemic. Most commercial court hearings continue to be conducted remotely, although a return to in-person hearings is currently being contemplated (at least for trials). Aside from attracting parties to arbitrate in the BVI, the framework also ensures that foreign arbitral awards are recognised and enforced effectively in the jurisdiction.

In the recent English High Court decision of Perez v Equiom Trust Corporation (UK) Ltd and Equiom Trust (South Dakota) LLC [2022], the claimant revoked an English law governed trust of which the defendants were the trustees, and sought declarations that the revocation was valid, and that the defendants held trust assets on bare trust for the claimant and at her direction.

Is this real life? Is this just fantasy? In a landslide victory for the Joint Official Liquidators (JOLs), the Grand Court in Jian Ying Ourgame High Growth Investment Fund (in Liquidation) (the Fund) v Powerful Warrior Limited (PWL) & Ors (FSD 255 of 2021/ 258 of 2021 (RPJ) 21 December 2022) determined that an arbitration agreement had escaped from reality.

In the recent decision of Hangzhou Jiudang Asset Management Co Ltd & Anor v Kei [2022] EWHC 3265 (Comm), the English High Court has clarified the circumstances in which a foreign judgment may be restricted from enforcement.

The English commercial court has upheld the “strong public interest” position that commercial parties are at liberty to agree to resolve their disputes by arbitration and should be made to keep that agreement. Further, English courts will not lightly conclude that a dispute between commercial parties is incapable, as a matter of public policy, of being submitted to arbitration.

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has handed down its judgment in Gol Linhas Aereas SA v MatlinPatterson Global Opportunities Partners (Cayman) II LP and others [2022] UKPC 21.

In this episode of our Take 10 podcast, Partner Andrew Thorp is joined by Partner Peter Ferrer, Co-head of our global Litigation, Insolvency and Restructuring team.

In this episode of our Take 10 podcast, Hong Kong partner Andrew Johnstone invites Peter Ferrer, our BVI-based co-head of the global Litigation, Insolvency and Restructuring team, and Hong Kong-based counsel Andrew Chin, to join him for a discussion on all things arbitration, particularly the use of arbitration in offshore disputes.