This series will feature casual 10 minute discussions on the latest litigation cases and market developments relevant to our offshore jurisdictions. Each episode is brought to you by Harneys global offshore law firm.
Take 10
Claim This Podcastby Harneys
5.0(2 reviews)
22 episodes
Updated Daily
Accepts GuestsHas SponsorsLocation 🇻🇬
Podcast Overview
This series will feature casual 10 minute discussions on the latest litigation cases and market developments relevant to our offshore jurisdictions. Each episode is brought to you by Harneys global offshore law firm.
Language
🇺🇲
Publishing Since
9/1/2019
Reach the team behind Take 10
Verified contact details for this show aren't on file yet — sign up to get notified when they land.
Recent Episodes
September 22, 2022
Arbitration and interim measures
<p>In this episode of our Take 10 podcast, Asia Managing Partner Ian Mann and Counsel Andrew Chin talk about how the legislature and judiciary of the British Virgin Islands (BVI) and the Cayman Islands are constructing a favourable landscape for the application of interim measures in aid of international arbitration, no matter where those arbitrations are seated.</p><p>Key takeaways:</p><ul><li>The BVI and Cayman Islands have established themselves as one of the key commercial jurisdictions in favour of arbitration by integrating the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration into their legislative framework and adopting a pro-enforcement judicial attitude to the enforcement of arbitral awards.</li><li>The most common type of interim measures taken in support of arbitration in the BVI and the Cayman Islands are Norwich Pharmacal applications to find out the identity and nature of the wrongdoers and applications for a freezing order to restrain the unlawful dissipation of assets.</li><li>Regulatory arbitrage is more prevalent in international arbitration due to its cross border nature. For example, if one had delayed in seeking a freezing order or could not prove a dissipation of assets, the Hong Kong courts may deny relief. However, this is not a requirement in the PRC where a freezing injunction could be obtained without fulfilling those criteria.</li></ul><br/>
February 21, 2022
Les Ambassadeurs Club freezing injunction
<p>In this episode of our Take 10 podcast, Asia Managing Partner Ian Mann and Partner Peter Ferrer discuss the case of Les Ambassadeurs Club Ltd v Yu.</p><p>Key takeaways:</p><ul><li>Les Ambassadeurs Club Ltd vs Yu is an English court of appeal case involving the test for a freezing injunction.</li><li>This is the second case Les Ambassadeurs Club has had to file against a customer.</li><li>The case concerned what is meant by “real risk of dissipation of assets”. The decision made it clear that it was not helpful to apply any gloss to the test and that a probability test ought not to be applied.</li><li>Every element within the test needs to be analysed thoroughly to ensure that relief is handed out where appropriate and that it is not overly used.</li></ul><br/>
December 15, 2021
Office holder independence
<p>In this episode of our Take 10 podcast, Asia Managing Partner Ian Mann and Partner William Peake discuss the case involving Global Fidelity Bank and their involuntary liquidation.</p><p><strong>Key takeaways</strong>:</p><ul><li>Cayman Court appointed liquidators are officers of the Court; they must be professional insolvency practitioners; and they must act independently in the best interests of those with the economic interest in the liquidation (being the shareholders in a solvent liquidation and the creditors in an insolvent liquidation).</li><li>The importance of the office holders entering into regular clear and transparent stakeholder communications.</li><li>The identity of the practitioners being appointed is usually uncontroversial; most of the instances where a challenge is brought concern allegations of actual lack of independence. However apparent lack of independence is just as important. The Cayman Court is vigilant to ensure not only actual independence, but also the appearance of independence; not least because of the need to maintain confidence in those whom the Court appoints.</li><li>Where a significant stakeholder objects to the appointment of proposed liquidators, the Court will give considerable weight to its views, if rational, held in good faith and on reasonable grounds; but no stakeholder can dictate who the Court should appoint.</li><li>Where an objection is based on a prior involvement or relationship with the company in liquidation, the prior relationship or involvement may be an advantage in some cases, in terms of saving costs and time; in others, it may be a disqualification.</li><li>In Re Global Fidelity Bank Ltd, in which Justice Doyle considers previous Cayman, English and Isle of Man decisions, and adopts the three stage test formulated in the 2013 Cayman case of Re Hadar Fund Ltd: This is that the Court must: (i) Identify the facts of the prior relationship or involvement; (ii) determine whether its existence is capable of impairing the appearance of independence and if so; and (iii) Determine if it is sufficiently material to the liquidation that a fair minded stakeholder would reasonably object to the appointment.</li><li>In <strong>Re Global Fidelity Bank</strong>, the very limited prior involvement of the joint voluntary liquidators of the bank was held not to be a bar to their appointment by the Court (on which they took a neutral stance) as official liquidators under the Court ordered supervision of the voluntary liquidation (which was ordered on their petition) as neither stage (ii) or (iii) was satisfied.</li></ul><br/>
22 total episodes available
Deep-dive analytics for Take 10
Frequently asked questions
Have a different question and can't find the answer you're looking for? Reach out to our support team by sending us an email and we'll get back to you as soon as we can.
- What is Take 10?
- How often does this podcast release new episodes?
This podcast updates daily.
- Where can I listen to this podcast?
This podcast is available on 4 platforms including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and more. You can also use the RSS feed directly.
- Does this podcast accept guests?
Yes, this podcast regularly features guests.
Legal Disclaimer
Pod Engine is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or officially connected with any of the podcasts displayed on this platform. We operate independently as a podcast discovery and analytics service.
All podcast artwork, thumbnails, and content displayed on this page are the property of their respective owners and are protected by applicable copyright laws. This includes, but is not limited to, podcast cover art, episode artwork, show descriptions, episode titles, transcripts, audio snippets, and any other content originating from the podcast creators or their licensors.
We display this content under fair use principles and/or implied license for the purpose of podcast discovery, information, and commentary. We make no claim of ownership over any podcast content, artwork, or related materials shown on this platform. All trademarks, service marks, and trade names are the property of their respective owners.
While we strive to ensure all content usage is properly authorized, if you are a rights holder and believe your content is being used inappropriately or without proper authorization, please contact us immediately at hey@podengine.ai for prompt review and appropriate action, which may include content removal or proper attribution.
By accessing and using this platform, you acknowledge and agree to respect all applicable copyright laws and intellectual property rights of content owners. Any unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or commercial use of the content displayed on this platform is strictly prohibited.