Offshore Litigation Blog

The Cayman Islands Grand Court has awarded indemnity costs in respect of an abusive application for the deferral of a company’s dissolution upon the completion of its voluntary liquidation: In re Skye Assets Fund SPC (in Voluntary Liquidation).

On 19 February 2025, the Supreme Court handed down judgment in El-Husseiny v Invest Bank PSC. The case concerned the interpretation of section 423 of the English Insolvency Act 1986 which provides remedies to creditors in circumstances where a debtor has taken steps to defeat or prejudice their claims by entering into a transaction at an undervalue.

The Commercial Court in England recently dismissed the Claimant bank's claim of a transaction to defraud creditors because the Bank had not properly pleaded the purpose for which it contended that the Defendant businessman had transferred assets to his family: Invest Bank PSC v El-Husseini.

The High Court in England has held that a defendant company may rely on public law defences in opposition to a petition seeking the winding up of the company on public interest grounds: The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Purity Limited.

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.