International / Offshore

A Privy Council judgment delivered simultaneously with the Supreme Court decision in Republic of Mozambique v Credit Suisse International. Lord Hodge delivered two important judgments on how to define and identify the “matters” which give rise to stay of legal proceedings in favour of arbitration (in England under Section 9 Arbitration Act 1996) and certain other related issues. In doing so, these Courts have dropped the overly “granular” approach adopted by English Courts recently and opted for a more nuanced and analytical approach favoured by the Australian courts. The legal analysis in the two decisions is more or less identical.

Read the FamilyMart Holding v Ting Chuan judgment here.

In a judgment handed down on 20 September 2023 following the trial of preliminary issues, the Deputy Judge of the Commercial Court held that it is not a rule of private international law that a final and binding foreign judgment on the merits must be enforceable in the foreign jurisdiction before it could be the subject of an application to ‘enforce’ the foreign judgment in this jurisdiction by a claim at common law, and dismissed the sixth defendant’s application to set aside a default judgment the claimant had obtained against the first defendant, as (i) there was accordingly no arguable defence, and (ii) the sixth defendant had not satisfied the Denton criteria.

Read Invest Bank v El-Husseini judgment here.

High Court confirms that a winding up petition may be brought notwithstanding a foreign exclusive jurisdiction clause.

Read the full judgment here.

Successfully acting for the respondent in Bermuda Court of Appeal in decision on breadth of standard form consent powers of fiduciary protectors of trusts. The Court reached a unanimous decision following full argument that the role of a fiduciary protector having a power of consent in relation to the exercise of trustee powers is “narrow” rather than “wide”.

Read a copy of the judgment here.

The Cayman Islands Court of Appeal clarifies important aspects of Cayman Islands’ property law regarding restrictive agreements, easements and Land Register rectification.

The Judge held that it is clear that there is reciprocity of enforcement of judgments between the English court and the UAE courts, and that enforcement of a costs order is not contrary to the public policy of the UAE. The Judge also found that “a straightforward route” to enforcement of an English costs would be to enforce the judgment in the DIFC and then to enforce the resulting DIFC judgment in the UAE.

Read the Invest Bank v El-Husseini and Others judgment here.

Acting for the successful respondent in one of the first reported decisions in the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands in this important case on when the Court will appoint inspectors to examine into and report on the affairs of a company at the behest of a minority shareholder.  Although a case on s.64 of the Cayman Companies Act, similar statutory provisions are to be found in legislation throughout the Commonwealth, and hopefully this case will be a useful precedent in those jurisdictions too.

Read a copy of the judgment here.

A key Privy Council decision of significance throughout the common law world, concerning the interplay between insolvency and trusts law. It has particular importance in circumstances where the trust fund is ‘insolvent’, in the sense that the trust assets are insufficient to meet the amounts due under the trustee’s right of indemnity.

Read a copy of the Equity Trust (Jersey) Ltd v Halabi judgment here.

A US$1 Billion damages claim, which arose out of the collapse of NMC PLC, a former FTSE 100 company, and its operating subsidiaries in the UAE, all of which are now in administration in England and Wales and the UAE. The claimant is an Abu Dhabi-based bank, and the first to third defendants are the former private shareholders in NMC PLC. The Bank alleged that the defendants are responsible, with others, for a serious fraud that appears to have taken place within the NMC Group of companies. The defendants all deny involvement in the fraud.

Read Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank PJSC v Shetty & others judgment here.

A multi-million euro, multi-faceted fraud claim in the Cayman Islands that made new law on the Cayman Fraudulent Dispositions Law.

Read the Raiffeisen Bank v. Scully Royalty Ltd & Others judgment here.

A South Africa’s largest ever private sector accounting fraud scandal. Alleged payments totalling approximately €95 million are said to have been made fraudulently. The case raises issues of German, Austrian, Swiss and BVI law.

The latest chapter in the long running and high-profile litigation instigated by the LIA seeking to recoup funds invested during the Gaddafi dictatorship in Libya. Successfully defended fraud and corruption claims to the value of £200m.

Read the full judgment here.

Proceedings across multiple jurisdictions and involve inter alia efforts to enforce against a yacht formerly owned by Mr Abramovich which was under arrest in Dubai. Case also involved alleged transactions in defraud of creditors contrary to section 423 of the Insolvency Act.

Read Akhmedova v Akhmedov judgment here.

One of the largest frauds ever perpetrated involving some 118 banks which together lent a total of $126 billion over two decades. The longest and largest appeal ever heard by the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands including substantial issues of cross-border insolvency, tracing and asset recovery.

Read AHAB v SAAD judgment here.

Representing a consortium of Indian banks, seeking Dr Mallya’s bankruptcy for a £1 billion debt. Dr Mallya, a famous and controversial public figure (and MP) in India, is the fallen Kingfisher Airways tycoon and is fighting extradition to India to face fraud charges. Enormously complex, involving Indian law, the concept of security in English and Indian law, cross-border issues (recognition and jurisdiction) and ulterior political motive.

To read the judgment please click here.

A high-value trusts dispute arising from the insolvency of the Freedom Bay property development scheme in St Lucia. The case raised important legal questions about trustees’ ability to rely on investors’ contributory negligence as a defence.