Offshore Litigation Blog

The recent Cayman Islands case of In the Matter of TFKT True Holdings provides valuable insight to the factors considered by the Grand Court when determining whether to grant a stay of a winding up petition pending the determination of parallel proceedings in Hong Kong.

In a significant development, the BVI Financial Services Commission has expanded the list of "relevant foreign countries" under Part XIX of the Insolvency Act 2003.

It is an established principle of insolvency law that the passage of time does not prevent claims which were not statute-barred at the date of insolvency from being proved later during the insolvency, even though the limitation period has in the meantime expired. This principle derives from the English decision of General Rolling Stock.

In the recent decision of Re Mega Gold Holdings Ltd, the Hong Kong Court of First Instance declined to follow the Privy Council’s BVI decision Sian Participation Corp (In Liquidation) v Halimeda International Ltd which clarified the approach to winding-up petitions in the context of agreements to arbitrate.

When a creditor with standing presents a winding up petition and the Court is satisfied that the respondent company is unable to pay its debts, the starting position is that the petitioning creditor is entitled to a winding up order as of right (or ex debito justitiae). The burden then falls on the respondent company to show the Court that a winding up order should not be made.

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.

In the recent case of Re UKCloud Ltd (In Liquidation), the English High Court examined whether the effect of a debenture granted by the Company gave the benefit of a fixed or floating charge over its internet protocol (IP) addresses. The distinction was important, impacting recoveries for the Company’s unsecured creditors.

In another major success for a Harneys team run out of its London office, Justice Mangatal’s judgment is the first to clarify the proper interpretation of s49 of the BVI Business Companies Act 2004 (BCA). The judgment resolves a longstanding question as to the necessary formalities for a person to become a shareholder in a BVI company.

The Judicial and Legal Services Commission announced on 27 May 2024 new Judicial appointments to the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court which take effect from 1 September 2024.