Cayman Islands enhances its Statement of Guidance on the Nature, Accessibility and Retention of Records

Published: 27 Sep 2017
Type: Insight

The Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (CIMA) has published an updated Statement of Guidance on the Nature, Accessibility and Retention of Records (the Guidance).


Its objective is to ensure that persons and entities regulated or registered under Cayman Islands regulatory laws, including company directors registered or licensed under the Directors Registration and Licensing Law, maintain records in a manner that promotes accessibility, clarity and the reduction of risk.

Previous guidance was first issued by CIMA in October 2003 and the new Guidance is based on research conducted by CIMA, feedback received from industry participants and a review of laws/measures issued in various jurisdictions. It is not intended to be prescriptive or exhaustive but rather it sets out CIMA’s “minimum expectations” of a relevant entity’s record keeping arrangements.

The Guidance will be of obvious benefit and reassurance to international clients of the Cayman Islands given the recent havoc wrought by storms elsewhere in the Caribbean. Clarity and certainty of robust information systems, data retention, controls and back up, further strengthen the Cayman Islands position as a leading international financial centre. In addition, the Guidance will help the Cayman Islands further demonstrate its commitment to ensuring proper maintenance of records, noting that discussions surrounding beneficial ownership information have been a high priority to international organisations such as the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development and the Financial Action Task Force.

Highlights include:

  • Relevant entities should maintain records in their original format for at least five years after a transaction date, with “original format” including electronic copies of paper-based records. This pre-existing requirement is the minimum time period for which records must be kept. For example, where a fiduciary relationship has been formed with clients it may be necessary to keep records for longer periods of time. In the case of trusts for example, the requirement to keep records may last for the life-time of the trust or for further periods thereafter.
  • Electronic records must be easily accessible and CIMA expects that most records should be provided within one to three business days from the time that they are requested by CIMA, whether stored within the Cayman Islands or in another jurisdiction.
  • CIMA requires that a relevant entity record information likely to be required by CIMA in such a way as to enable a particular transaction to be identified at any time and traced through the accounting systems of the relevant entity, in particular in such manner as to enable early identification of balances and of the particular items which make up those balances.

Examples of records which CIMA expects a relevant entity to keep include:

  • (detailed) corporate accounting records
  • organisational records
  • employee and other administrative records
  • risk management policies
  • corporate records such as incorporation documents, shareholders’ and directors’ meeting minutes and board resolutions
  • client records such as client communication and complaints records
  • service provider records such as copies of contracts and agreements
  • customer due diligence records
  • annual returns filed with CIMA

CIMA requires that the record-keeping be sufficient to enable it to monitor compliance with regulatory and anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism financing obligations. Relevant entities must also maintain adequate procedures for the availability, maintenance, security, privacy and preservation of records belonging to the relevant entity, clients or others so that they are reasonably safeguarded against loss, unauthorised access, alteration or destruction. This includes records retained electronically or by any other medium.

Where records are maintained outside the Cayman Islands through outsourcing, storage, or other arrangements, the relevant entity remains ultimately responsible for record keeping requirements and accessibility to records by CIMA.

Appleby’s regulatory team in the Cayman Islands specialises in complex financial services regulatory work for banks, insurers, trust companies, mutual fund administrators, company managers, corporate services providers, insurance managers and other financial services institutions regulated in the Cayman Islands. The dedicated team provides advice to local and international businesses on the management of the legal, commercial and reputational risks often associated with regulatory and legislative issues. Our regulatory specialists cover the full range of financial services matters. We also routinely advise regulated financial institutions on the regulatory implications and reporting requirements in relation to mergers, acquisitions and reorganisations, as well as interpretation and application of statements of principle and guidance issued by CIMA. Our unique blend of experience and unique insight ensures that the advice we provide is highly commercial and practical encompassing the full range of offshore regulatory issues and problems that arise for our financial service providers, regulators and governments

Share
More publications
The Exception To The Rule: Stricter Test Applies Where Granting An Interlocutory Injunction Would Shut Out Trial
28 Apr 2026

The Interplay Between Supervision Applications and Winding Up on the Just and Equitable Ground: Re Atlas Capital Markets LLC

In its recent judgment in Re Atlas Capital Markets LLC [2026] CIGC (FSD) 19, the Grand Court considered itself bound to make a supervision order pursuant to s.131(b) of the Companies Act, notwithstanding that the company was the subject of a pending just and equitable winding up (J&E) petition when its voluntary liquidation was commenced; and rejected an attack on the joint voluntary liquidators’ (JVLs) independence, which was principally based on a misreading of the JVLs’ evidence and lacked any objective foundation. The authors, who successfully represented the JVLs in obtaining the supervision order, discuss this important judgment further below – which is believed to be the first decision on the interplay between supervision applications and J&E proceedings under the Companies Act – and offer their views on the guidance that shareholders petitioning on the just and equitable ground may derive from it in future cases.  The challenge to the JVLs’ independence was rejected on the well-established principles which Doyle J discussed in Re Global Fidelity Bank [2021] 2 CILR 361, and is not discussed in further detail below.

Appleby-Website-Insurance-and-Reinsurance
23 Apr 2026

ReConnect 2026: Practical takeaways for Reinsurers, Cedants and Investors doing business in the Cayman Islands

The Cayman International Reinsurance Commercial Association (CIRCA) held its annual conference, [Re]Connect, last week at the Ritz-Carlton, Grand Cayman. This year’s [Re]Connect has once again demonstrated Cayman’s growing influence in global reinsurance and the strength of the jurisdiction’s regulatory, professional and commercial ecosystem. The event brought together 675 registered delegates, including reinsurers, cedants, major US law firms, audit firms, tax practices, asset managers, overseas regulators, industry leaders and rating agencies – as well as Appleby Cayman’s [Re]Insurance Team, with Miriam Smyth, Regulatory Counsel, speaking on a panel of experts on structuring, licensing and operating a Cayman insurer.

The Exception To The Rule: Stricter Test Applies Where Granting An Interlocutory Injunction Would Shut Out Trial
23 Apr 2026

FamilyMart and Beyond: The Continuing Influence of the Privy Council’s Landmark Decision on Shareholder Litigation

The Privy Council's decision in FamilyMart China Holding Co Ltd v Ting Chuan (Cayman Islands) Holding Corp [2023] UKPC 33 is a landmark ruling that distinguishes the arbitrability of underlying shareholder disputes from the court's exclusive jurisdiction over just and equitable winding-up of a Cayman company.

Appleby-Website-Private-Client-and-Trusts-Practice
22 Apr 2026

Regulation, Regulation, Regulation

The article discusses updates to global trust guidance and regulation, as well as beneficial ownership and the regulatory burden on trustees that comes with increased transparency.

Appleby-Website-Corporate-Practice
22 Apr 2026

Prospects of Asian Companies in U.S. Listings in 2026

Nasdaq introduced a series of rule changes in 2025 to raise minimum requirements for public float and offering size for certain new listings.

Website-Code-Cayman
20 Apr 2026

Avoiding The Nuclear Option: Buyout Orders In Just And Equitable Winding Up Proceedings

With the Cayman Islands being a preferred jurisdiction for the incorporation of investment vehicles, inevitably cases will arise where non-controlling shareholders complain that they are being unfairly prejudiced by conduct of those in control, and necessarily pursue those complaints by way of proceedings to wind up the subject company on the just and equitable ground. Where such complaints are well-founded, the outcome will often be an order putting the subject company into official liquidation.  But the Cayman courts also have the jurisdiction in such cases to make a range of other orders as alternatives to taking that nuclear option, and are indeed obliged to consider whether any of those alternative orders would provide a more appropriate solution to the complaints.[1] The Grand Court was recently required to conduct that analysis in the case of Re Position Mobile Ltd SEZC.[2]  The petitioning shareholder in that case had satisfied the Court that it would be just and equitable to wind up the company – since it had justifiably lost confidence in the probity of those in control, due to their serious and sustained misconduct and mismanagement – but positively sought a buyout order[3] as an alternative to a winding up.  The Court thus proceeded to consider whether the buyout order, or any other alternative order, would be more appropriate than ordering a winding up, and concluded that a buyout order was the fairest and most appropriate form of relief in the circumstances of that case. The authors will discuss the guidance which the Position Mobile case provides in that regard below, which should be considered together with the guidance provided by Re Madera Technology Fund (CI) Ltd,[4] particularly in respect of the approach that the Cayman courts can be expected to take when setting the appropriate valuation date for a buyout order, with a view to ensuring that the valuation is fair to each side.[5] [1] See Re Virginia Solution SPC Ltd (unrep. 28 July 2023, CICA) at [61]. [2] [2026] CIGC (FSD) 10 [3] Requiring the respondent shareholders to purchase its shares at a fair price. [4] (unrep. 21 Aug. 2024, Richards J). [5] For further detail, see the authors’ article on the Madera Technology case at https://www.applebyglobal.com/publications/no-looking-back-investor-held-to-buyout-at-current-value-of-shares/.

The Exception To The Rule: Stricter Test Applies Where Granting An Interlocutory Injunction Would Shut Out Trial
7 Apr 2026

No Claim, No Injunction: What Does a Limited Partner Actually Own?

What equitable proprietary interest, if any, does a limited partner hold in the assets of a Cayman Islands exempted limited partnership, and is that interest is sufficient to ground a proprietary injunction? These questions lie at the heart of Parker J’s recent judgment in the matter of Charitable DAF HoldCo, Ltd (in Official Liquidation), in which the Grand Court refused proprietary injunctive relief sought by joint official liquidators against former directors and associated entities. The judgment holds that the Company, as a limited partner in a Cayman ELP, had no equitable proprietary interest in the Fund’s underlying assets of the quality required to found the relief sought. While the court did not exclude the possibility of an LP having proprietary rights in an ELP’s assets, it held that on the particular facts of the case such rights were excluded.

Appleby-Website-Cayman2
30 Mar 2026

The Regulation of Cayman Islands Tokenised Funds – Clear Rules Now in Place

On 5 March 2026 the Virtual Asset (Service Providers) (Amendment Bill), 2026, the Mutual Funds (Amendment) Bill, 2026 and the Private Funds (Amendment) Bill, 2026 were passed by the Parliament of the Cayman Islands with unanimous support, providing welcome clarity that Cayman Islands tokenised funds are regulated within Cayman’s existing Mutual Funds Act (MFA) and Private Funds Act (PFA) framework and do not fall within the scope of the Virtual Asset (Service Providers) Act (VASPA).

Appleby-Website-Regulatory-Practice
19 Mar 2026

Key Regulatory Requirements of SIBA Registered Persons in the Cayman Islands

Registered Persons under the Securities Investment Business Act (Revised) (SIBA) attract regulatory requirements including annual reporting requirements with key filing deadlines falling in January and, typically, December each year. The Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (CIMA)’s recently issued General Industry Notice to the effect that all SIBA Registered Persons will be additionally required to submit a Prudential Information Survey for the 2025 calendar year (by 31 March 2026) has signaled CIMA's continued focus on enhancing the resilience, transparency and prudential soundness of the securities investment business (SIB) sector in the Cayman Islands. Accordingly, this briefing reviews some of the other key regulatory and reporting obligations that attach to Registered Persons under SIBA, CIMA’s associated Rules and Statements of Guidance (SOG), the applicable Anti-Money Laundering Regulations (Cayman AML Regulations) the Tax Information Authority (International Tax Compliance) (Common Reporting Standard) Regulations (Revised) (Cayman CRS Regulations) and, where applicable, The International Tax Co-operation (Economic Substance) Act (Revised) (ES Act).