A recent decision of the Financial Services Division of the Cayman Islands Grand Court (Fortunate Drift Ltd v Canterbury Securities Ltd) examined whether the Court had jurisdiction to compel a party to produce information sought by a financial service provider to protect it from breaching its statutory obligations under the Anti-Money Laundering Regulations.

Justice Kawaley found the Court had no statutory power to order Fortunate Drift to provide Canterbury with the KYC information it had requested following a change in the beneficial ownership of Fortunate Drift. However, Justice Kawaley held that the court did have inherent jurisdiction and as a condition of continuing the order in which the undertakings were given, to order Fortune Drift, who had the benefit of the freezing of dispositions of the shares, to provide the information that Canterbury legitimately required for compliance with its statutory obligations.

Harneys’ detailed Litigation Blog post can be found here.