Back to Basics- Disputes Series
Foreign Officeholders in the British Virgin Islands - Recognition or Assistance? In the context of cross-border insolvency, it is important to distinguish between the two concepts: o "Recognition", being the formal act of the BVI court recognising a foreign representative as having status in the BVI; and o "Assistance" from the BVI Court which grants power to the foreign representative to actually deal with BVI assets and access to a wide range of statutory relief. In many jurisdictions, statutory schemes exist to marry those two concepts together and provide a complete package by which assistance in foreign insolvency proceedings is rendered. In the BVI, things are less straightforward as (i) the BVI has not adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency and (ii) Part XVIII of the BVI Insolvency Act 2003 (Cross-Border Insolvency), based on the Model Law, has not come into effect. As a consequence, assistance from the BVI Court does not necessarily follow recognition unless the foreign officeholder was appointed in a designated “relevant foreign country”. Fortunately, BVI's flexible regime provides some options to foreign officeholders from non-designated jurisdictions where statutory assistance under the Insolvency Act is not available.


Collateral beauty: taking security in fund finance
The article examines the mechanics of taking security over limited partnership interests in Cayman exempted limited partnerships (ELP) and highlights key considerations for lenders, investors and fund managers.

Back to Basics - Disputes Series
Statutory Demands in the BVI - Serve or Swerve? A statutory demand is a familiar feature of insolvency processes across the world, and the BVI is no different. In theory, a statutory demand can be a useful tool used by a creditor to force a company to either pay an outstanding debt, or run the risk of liquidation.


Computation of time in employment related matters: Play Safe!
Case Commentary- Employment Law BAYPORT MANAGEMENT LIMITED v SOWKHEE L M (2025 SCJ 249)


“Taking Note” may end on a bad note for litigants
The importance of replying to each paragraph of pleadings and the consequence of just “taking note” of averments has been extensively underlined in the recent case of ESPACE AUTOMOBILE LTEE v ASCENCIA LTD (2024 SCJ 438).

