Many will have waited for a bus only for two to come along at once. So it is in the Cayman Islands, with the ongoing saga as to whether a shareholder can make a claim for misrepresentation in a liquidation and, if so, where such a claim ranks in the order of priority. The rule in Houldsworth barring such claims has been in existence for over 140 years. However, two liquidations have, within weeks of each other, sought to overturn this longstanding rule.
FEBRUARY 2024 mourant.com 2021934/89586498/1 UPDATE 2023’s most significant legal developments and what to look out for in 2024 Update prepared by Saniyé Tipirdamaz, Adrian Dobbyn, Eléonore Galleron, Mathieu Gangloff and Romain Bordage (Luxembourg) In 2023, in Luxembourg, we witnessed a number of significant legal developments in the areas of Banking & Finance, Restructuring & Insolvency, Corporate, Investment Funds and Tax. In 2024, new legislation which will impact upon businesses and their investment strategies are expected to be introduced.
Avoidance action is an umbrella term for adversary proceedings that seek to unwind or avoid transactions that occurred before an insolvency filing. These actions are also referred to as “claw-back claims” because, by undoing a transaction, an asset or value is being clawed back into the insolvency estate.
El pasado 20 de julio de 2023 fue publicado en el Boletín Oficial de Estado el Real Decreto 668/2023, de 18 de julio, que modificó el Reglamento de planes y fondos de pensiones al objeto de completar la regulación e impulso de los planes de pensiones de empleo y reforzar así, el segundo pilar de la previsión social en España. Este artículo aborda las principales novedades del último desarrollo reglamentario y repasa algunos de los retos que persisten de cara a impulsar y consolidar el segundo pilar y motivar el ahorro.
In the Matter of Holt Fund SPC (Unreported, 26 January 2024) is the first occasion where an application has been made to appoint Restructuring Officers over portfolios of a segregated portfolio company. At first glance the judgment appears uncontroversial. However, it highlights a lacuna in the law which readers should be aware of.
Background
The Petitioner sought the appointment of Restructuring Officers (ROs) in respect of two segregated portfolios of the Holt Fund SPC.
Looking back at 2023, one of the more memorable judicial decisions emanating from Jersey was the decision of the Court of Appeal in HWA 555 Owners, LLC v Redox PLC S.A. and Thieltgen [2023] JCA 085. In this update we explore how this decision might impact upon the creditors’ winding-up regime provided for in the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991.
HWA 555 Owners, LLC v Redox PLC S.A. and Thieltgen
Introduction
In this article we explore the key trends which are currently shaping the landscape of private wealth disputes, including mental capacity as a central theme in private wealth disputes, trust insolvency and disputes relating to trustee investments.
Mental capacity
Mental capacity is increasingly a central theme on the landscape of private wealth disputes. Why? The starting point is that there is, more so than at any point previously, a wider recognition of the seismic consequences of establishing mental incapacity on the part of the relevant decision maker.
The Grand Court of the Cayman Islands has provided further guidance on the new restructuring officer (RO) regime under section 91B of the Companies Act (2023 Revision) (the Act), which came into force on 31 August 2022.
In Re Aubit International (Unreported, 4 October 2023), the Grand Court dismissed a petition to appoint restructuring officers and found that it did not have jurisdiction to grant the relief requested on the basis that there was no credible evidence of a rational restructuring proposal with reasonable prospects of success.
The Privy Council has considered the question of whether an agreement to settle disputes arising out of a shareholders' agreement by arbitration prevents a party to the agreement pursuing a petition to wind up the company on just and equitable grounds.
Background
The recent ex-tempore judgment of Kawaley J in Atom Holdings1 in the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands serves as a timely reminder to practitioners and industry participants alike that obtaining an adjournment of a winding-up petition2 requires cogent evidence demonstrating good reason(s) for delaying what is otherwise the collective right of creditors to seek relief via court intervention.