In the case of Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank PJSC v Algosaibi Trading Services Limited  SC (Bda) 71 Com (12 September 2014), the Chief Justice delivered an ex tempore judgment which clarified what the position is when a registered office purports to resign. It confirmed the traditional view held by many commercial practitioners that section 62(3) of the Companies’ Act 1981 (the “Act”) means that when a registered office has not been changed with the Registrar of Companies (“ROC”), the last known registered office remains the effective office for service.
In January this year we acted for the Plaintiff against five Defendants in a claim for damages for breach of a Sale & Purchase Agreement of a Bermudian fund management company. The Defendants were directors and shareholders of the fund management company and had negotiated a staged management buyout from the Plaintiff vendor. The Plaintiff alleged that the Defendants entered into an agreement with another fund manager to conduct business from their platform in an attempt to evade liability for ongoing payment of the staged purchase trailer fees (“the impugned transaction”).
Article 8 UNCITRAL Model Law
In September of this year we acted on a very significant international commercial dispute where the question arose as to whether proceedings in Bermuda would be stayed pending the determination of arbitral proceedings in Canada which would deal with the central question of whether a previous settlement agreement extended to the Defendant and whether the Defendant had a complete defence to the Claim.
In its 2014 decision, the Court of Appeal considered Chief Justice Kawaley’s first instance 2013 decision to order the production of trust documents to a beneficiary notwithstanding that the trust deed contained an information control mechanism designed to prevent disclosure of financial information unless the Protector (who was also the principal beneficiary) consented.