Cayman Islands: Investors' Claims For Unpaid Redemption Proceeds In The Winding Up Of Cayman Islands Investment Funds

Last Updated: 15 August 2016
Article by Matthew Goucke and Chris Keefe

Most Read Contributor in Cayman Islands, September 2018

Some refinement regarding the priority to be afforded to investors' claims for unpaid redemption proceeds in the winding up of Cayman Islands investment funds; however, questions linger.

Introduction

A recent judgment of the Cayman Islands Court of Appeal1 (CICA) has provided a degree of certainty for investors and insolvency practitioners alike with respect to the priority to be afforded to investors' claims for unpaid redemption proceeds in the winding up of Cayman Islands investment funds. The judgment has, however, given rise to uncertainty with respect to the enforceability of such claims, with enforceability now seemingly entirely dependent on the particular terms of redemption contained in individual articles of association.

The CICA decision is the most recent in the ongoing liquidation proceedings of Herald Fund SPC (Herald), a segregated portfolio company incorporated in the Cayman Islands which was one of the largest so-called feeder funds into the Madoff Ponzi scheme.

This aspect of the proceedings involves an important point of statutory construction, namely how section 37(7) of the Companies Law operates in the context of significant unpaid redemption proceeds sought to be enforced several years after the discovery of the Ponzi Scheme notwithstanding that, with the benefit of hindsight, those redemption claims were clearly based on a wholly fictitious NAV. The outcome of the proceedings would be highly material to Herald's various categories of stakeholders (the redemption claims, if valid, being valued at almost $200m). The issue is one that has rarely confronted the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands (Grand Court) and certainly this was the first time it had been considered at appellate level.

The Additional Liquidator of Herald2 has subsequently issued a further appeal to the ultimate appellate Court of the Cayman Islands, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (Privy Council). It is hoped the Privy Council will hear and determine the appeal within the next 6 – 12 months.

Background

Prior to the discovery of Madoff's fraud in December 2008, a significant number of investors in Herald had submitted redemption requests for a trade date of 1 December 2008 (the December Redeemers), with payment specified under the constituent documents to be made generally within 20 business days after that date. Under Herald's Articles of Association (Articles), the trade date was specified to be the "Redemption Day", with the articles of a Cayman Islands mutual fund. payment of redemption proceeds and removal from the share register to be completed thereafter – a very common, if not typical, mechanism in

Shortly after Madoff was arrested on 11 December 2008, Herald's directors convened a board meeting on 12 December 2008 at which they passed a resolution suspending the calculation of NAV, subscriptions, redemptions and, importantly, the payment of redemption proceeds3 – in excess of $190 million of which had not yet been paid to the December Redeemers. This suspension took place after the 1 December 2008 Redemption Day had passed (the Directors being wholly unaware at the time that Herald's sole asset was about to be exposed as an interest in the world's largest Ponzi Scheme).

Following the presentation of a winding up petition by the largest December Redeemer, Primeo Fund (in Official Liquidation) (Primeo)4, Herald was placed into official liquidation in July 2013. Primeo and various of the other December Redeemers subsequently filed proofs of debt in the ordinary way in respect of their claims for unpaid redemption proceeds.

Rather than adjudicating those proofs of debt in accordance with the procedure set out in the Companies Law and The Companies Winding Up Rules (CWR), the Additional Liquidator of Herald sought directions from the Grand Court as to the enforceability of those "redemption creditor" claims under section 37(7)(a) of the Companies Law (the December Redeemer Issue).

Section 37(7)(a) provides:

Where a company is being wound up and, at the commencement of the winding up, any of its shares which are or are liable to be redeemed have not been redeemed or which the company has agreed to purchase have not been purchased, the terms of redemption or purchase may be enforced against the company, and when shares are redeemed or purchased under this subsection they shall be treated as cancelled:

Provided that this paragraph shall not apply if-

  1. the terms of redemption or purchase provided for the redemption or purchase to take place at a date later than the date of the commencement of the winding up; or
  2. during the period beginning with the date on which the redemption or purchase was to have taken place and ending with the commencement of the winding up the company could not, at any time, have lawfully made a distribution equal in value to the price at which the shares were to have been redeemed or purchased.

Utilising a mechanism available under the CWR, the Grand Court made orders for the determination of the December Redeemer Issue through inter partes proceedings within Herald's liquidation5, with Primeo appointed as class representative for the December Redeemers and the Additional Liquidator appointed as class representative for Herald's remaining stakeholders.6

First Instance Ruling

At the first instance hearing in the Grand Court in June 2015, Primeo contended that the December Redeemers fell outside the scope of section 37(7) of the Companies Law in circumstances where the December Redeemers had already "redeemed" their shares as a matter of law on 1 December 2008 and those shares were not therefore shares which "are or are liable to be redeemed but have not been redeemed" under section 37(7)(a) of the Companies Law. Primeo also sought a declaration that the December Redeemers had a creditor claim ranking pari passu with external or third party creditors.

Acknowledging that the legislative drafting of section 37(7) was not as precise as it could have been, the Additional Liquidator took the position that, claim was enforceable in a liquidation in circumstances where section 37 of the Companies Law established a complete code for the issuance and redemption of shares and, in that context, the term "redemption" in the statute was concerned with the payment of redemption proceeds. notwithstanding Herald's articles focused on a redemption date, this was immaterial when determining whether or not a "redemption creditor"

In determining the December Redeemer Issue in favour of Primeo, the Grand Court found that the December Redeemers had "redeemed" their shares on 1 December 2008 and, accordingly, fell outside the operation of section 37(7) of the Companies Law.

As a result, it seemed that as a consequence of the Grand Court's decision, "redemption creditors" were entitled to prove in a winding up as creditors, with their claims to be paid pari passu with the claims of ordinary third party or "outside" creditors7 – a significant departure from the previously accepted position in the Cayman Islands and, indeed, the long-standing position at common law.

The Additional Liquidator appealed the Grand Court's ruling.

CICA Decision

Affirming the Grand Court's ruling, the CICA found that, as a matter of construction, section 37(7)(a) of the Companies Law does not apply to the claims of December Redeemers in circumstances where, at the commencement of the winding up, the relevant redeemable shares had been "redeemed" in accordance with the terms of Herald's Articles, notwithstanding that payment had not been made and was not due to be paid at that time.

The CICA instead found that the December Redeemers were "contingent creditors" who had, as a result of having "redeemed" the relevant shares in accordance with the terms of the Articles prior to the commencement of the liquidation, divested themselves of their rights as shareholders, meaning that they had provable claims under section 139(1) of the Companies Law without the need of a specific enactment in the nature of section 37(7)(a).

The CICA however rejected Primeo's contention that the claims of the December Redeemers rank pari passu with the claims of ordinary third party or "outside" creditors, accepting the Additional Liquidator's submission that those claims are claims founded on the statutory contract of membership, and therefore are subordinated to the claims of ordinary third party or "outside" creditors – a position which is consistent with over 100 years of common law jurisprudence.

In affirming the Grand Court's ruling, it was necessary for the CICA to find a coherent construction for the operation of section 37(7)(a). The CICA expressed the view that section 37(7)(a) applies where, at the commencement of a company's winding up, a holder of redeemable shares has an accrued right of redemption (having served a valid notice under the relevant articles of association), but there has been no redemption because the steps required for "redemption" to occur under the relevant articles of association have not been completed (meaning that no payment of redemption proceeds has been made).

One difficulty with this application of section 37(7)(a) is that any such claim would appear to be immediately rendered unenforceable in a winding up by reason of the operation of the proviso in section 37(7)(a)(i) of the Companies Law, which renders claims under section 37(7)(a) unenforceable in circumstances where the terms of redemption provide for redemption (which, as a result of the CICA's decision, can only mean redemption under the relevant articles of association) to take place at a date after the commencement of the winding up, which effectively leaves the section with no discernible purpose and makes the provisions of section 37(7)(a)(ii) and section 37(7)(b) redundant.8

As a result of the CICA's decision, it appears that there is no consistent statutory definition of the term "redemption". "Redemption" for the purposes of the Companies Law and, in particular, section 37(7)(a), means whatever "redemption" means under the specific provisions of articles of association which are being considered. Accordingly, the enforceability of a claim for unpaid redemption proceeds is now entirely dependent on how "redemption" is defined under the relevant articles of association. In a statutory context, it does not mean "payment of redemption proceeds" as investors would legitimately expect in ordinary parlance. This has essentially shifted part of the statutory insolvency regime into the realm of contract.

Conclusion

Whilst the CICA's decision provides welcome clarity that claims for the payment of redemption proceeds in a winding up will always rank behind ordinary third party or "outside" creditors, uncertainty remains for investors as to the enforceability of those claims in the absence of a consistent statutory definition of "redemption". Absent clarification from the Privy Council, this has the potential to create real difficulties as new and existing funds alike (together with their respective investors and prospective investors) may reconsider new formulations of what "redemption" means under their individual constituent documents.9

The current state of the law still does not reflect a coherent interpretation of section 37(7)(a). Regardless of the ultimate outcome of the Privy Council appeal in this matter, further clarification is required – either by the Privy Council itself or by way of legislative reform.

Matthew Goucke and Chris Keefe act for the Additional Liquidator of Herald.10

Footnotes

1. Michael Pearson (in his capacity as Additional Liquidator of Herald Fund SPC (in Official Liquidation)) v Primeo Fund (in Official Liquidation), unreported, 19 July 2016.

2. An additional official liquidator was appointed in addition to two joint official liquidators for the purpose of dealing with a number of discrete issues in the liquidation.

3. A second resolution was passed on 24 December 2008 which, inter alia, suspended the payment of outstanding redemption requests (prior to the date upon which Herald would otherwise have been contractually obligated to pay those redemption requests). In any event, as Herald's sole asset (other than a limited amount of cash for operating expenses) was its interest in BLMIS, Herald was not in a position to pay those redemption requests at the time (or indeed for many years thereafter).

4. This was a contributory's "just and equitable" petition, rather than a creditor's petition.

5. Given the number of common issues between the Herald and Primeo liquidations, the Grand Court also directed, by way of a "parallel order", that any matters determined in Herald's "representative proceedings" would be similarly binding in Primeo's liquidation.

6. The Grand Court also made orders for the substantive determination of a number of other issues in the same "representative proceedings"; however, these issues are unrelated to the December Redeemer Issue.

7. As the CICA pointed out, this was not dealt with expressly in the first instance judgment.

8. A matter which was raised in submissions by the Additional Liquidator, but not addressed by the CICA in its judgment.

9. It should be noted that the facts of this case were somewhat unusual in the sense that Herald had a single asset which had historically always had immediate liquidity. Accordingly, notwithstanding the receipt of redemption requests totaling some $190m for 1 December 2008, the Directors did not contemplate taking the usual defensive measures facing a fund with liquidity issues such as the imposition of a suspension of redemptions and/ or "gates" prior to the Redemption Day.

10. Together with Leading Counsel, Lord Goldsmith QC PC and Francis Tregear QC.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Conyers Dill & Pearman
 
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Conyers Dill & Pearman
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions