The recent Grand Court decision in T Co v AA, BB, CC, DD, EE (a minor) is a good reminder of the court's approach to service out of the jurisdiction and provides insight on the scope of jurisdiction clauses contained in trust instruments.
In Nord Anglia the justice made directions orders regarding the use of keyword searches, the number and scope of information requests, and the conduct of management meetings consistent with the orders made in Xiadu Life Technology. Further, the judgment will provide welcome safeguards for companies facing appraisal litigation in the Cayman Islands if adopted on a wider basis.
Appeals to the Privy Council from the Court of Appeal are regulated in the Cayman Islands (Appeals to Privy Council) Order 1984. However, the order does not provide for how to determine the date of a decision. The Court of Appeal recently ruled that for the purposes of an application for leave to appeal to the Privy Council, time runs from the date on which an order is sealed or perfected, not the date on which the judgment is delivered.
The recent changes that have been made to the anti-money laundering regime will bring the Cayman Islands into line with international best practice and are a welcome update to the territory's financial services landscape. In reality, the changes will not affect the majority of investment funds using the jurisdiction, but updates to documentation and procedures may be required.
The Cayman Islands has amended the beneficial ownership register regime for Cayman companies and limited liability companies, meaning that some previously out-of-scope companies are now in scope and must maintain a register. In addition, all out-of-scope companies must now file a written confirmation of the basis for their exemption with their corporate services provider, and these providers must regularly file the received beneficial ownership information with the competent authority.