- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
This Is Not A Wind-Up: BVI Court Approves Restructuring Provisional Liquidation
In a major development in BVI insolvency law and practice, the BVI Commercial Court has held in the case of Constellation Overseas Limited and 5 others [BVIHC (Com) 2018/0206 – 2012] that provisional liquidation is available to facilitate a restructuring. The decision brings the BVI broadly into line with Cayman and Bermuda, where restructuring provisional liquidations have been used...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
In a major development in BVI insolvency law and practice, the BVI Commercial Court has held in the case of Constellation Overseas Limited and 5 others [BVIHC (Com) 2018/0206 – 2012] that provisional liquidation is available to facilitate a restructuring. The decision brings the BVI broadly into line with Cayman and Bermuda, where restructuring provisional liquidations have been used to support a number of landmark cross-border restructurings in recent years
In the proceedings, six BVI companies (part of a group headquartered in Brazil) sought the appointment of provisional liquidators to support the group's restructuring, which is driven by a Brazilian Judicial Reorganization procedure. That was in turn supported by Chapter 15 proceedings in the USA. The companies required the protection against "predatory creditor claims" afforded by the moratorium imposed by a BVI provisional liquidation; there was no current intention to wind up the BVI companies or the group.
The judge found that the BVI Court has a "very wide common law jurisdiction" to appoint provisional liquidators for restructuring purposes, based on authority from the courts of England, Cayman and Bermuda (amongst others). He distinguished certain Hong Kong cases which suggested that provisional liquidation was only available in that jurisdiction where the objective was liquidation.
The essence of a restructuring provisional liquidation is that the company remains in the day to day control of its directors, but enjoys protection from claims by individual creditors. The objective is to provide a better outcome for creditors than would be likely on a winding up. The judge also found that "there is persuasive authority in England for using [provisional liquidation] in support of… a foreign restructuring process."
The key determining factors in favor of granting the order in this case were:
1. the companies were cash flow (but not balance sheet) insolvent;
2. there was a real prospect of a restructuring being achieved, resulting in a better outcome for creditors than would be the case on a winding up;
3. the application was supported by a number of the group's major creditors.
This ruling is to be welcomed as adding to the range of effective procedures available in the BVI to facilitate crossborder restructurings.
However, the judge's decision to import what may be described as "radical" innovations into a largely codified statutory insolvency regime may reignite the debate over the extent to which this is appropriate in insolvency law (see Singular is v PwC). As such, the decision will certainly influence the current debate in the BVI on reforms to the insolvency legislation.
Disclaimer – The foregoing is for general information only and not intended to be relied upon for legal advise in any specific or individual situation. Bermuda legal services are provided through an exclusive association with Zuill & Co which is an independently owned and controlled Bermudian law firm.
Based in Singapore, James lead Carey Olsen’s Litigation, Insolvency and Restructuring practice in Asia and advise on Bermuda, British Virgin Islands (BVI) and Cayman Islands law. James is also the only BVI and Cayman admitted litigator in Singapore. James specializes in complex and high value shareholder litigation, asset recovery, cross-border enforcement and insolvency and has nearly 20 years’ experience working in a wide variety of commercial, trust and estate disputes and private wealth matters. James is recognized as an expert in asset recovery in the latest edition of Who’s Who Legal and regularly acts in high profile and market leading cases, particularly in connection with companies listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange.