Fulltext Search

Grant Thornton were appointed as receivers over a BVI company under Section 43 of the Arbitration Act 2013 to preserve the value of the company pending the determination of foreign arbitration proceedings. The defendant in the arbitration owned the shares of the BVI Company.

In the latest judgment regarding the DPH liquidation,(1) the BVI Court of Appeal upheld the appointment of BVI provisional liquidators in respect of a Swiss company and clarified that evidence of dissipation of assets (in the Mareva sense) may not be a pre-condition to the appointment of provisional liquidators.

Facts

A recent BVI Court of Appeal decision in KMG International NV v DP Holding SA serves as a useful reminder to keep an eye on the clock when seeking the appointment of liquidators to a company in the British Virgin Islands.

KMG had filed an originating application seeking the appointment of liquidators to DPH (a company incorporated in Switzerland) and had successfully applied for:

Claims of passing off are rare in the British Virgin Islands and a recent attempt to bring a BVI action in relation to goodwill held outside the jurisdiction has failed.(1)

The claimants were Egyptian private equity investors with over $516 million in assets under management and a long, respected track record in development and management of various investment projects in the Egyptian market.

The defendants included a former employee of the claimants and the companies through which he operated.

The recent BVI Court of Appeal decision in KMG International NV v DP Holding SA serves as a useful reminder to keep an eye on the clock when seeking the appointment of liquidators to a company in the BVI.

With two decisions (No. 1895/2018 and No. 1896/2018), both filed on 25 January 2018, the Court of Cassation reached opposite conclusions in the two different situations

The case

The Constitutional Court (6 December 2017) confirmed that Art. 147, para. 5, of the Italian Bankruptcy Law does not violate the Constitution as long as it is interpreted in a broad sense

The case

With the decision No. 1195 of 18 January 2018, the Court of Cassation ruled on the powers of the extraordinary commissioner to require performance of pending contracts and on the treatment of the relevant claims of the suppliers

The case

The Court of Cassation with a decision of 25 September 2017, No. 22274 confirms that Art. 74 of the Italian Bankruptcy Law provides a special rule, which does not apply to cases to which it is not explicitly extended

The case

With the decision No. 1649 of 19 September 2017 the Court of Appeals of Catania followed the interpretation according to which a spin-off is not subject to the avoiding powers of a bankruptcy receiver

The case