Cayman Islands: Wound Up, Or Not? Rhône Holdings In The Cayman Courts

Last Updated: 12 September 2016
Article by Ben Hobden

Insolvency petitions form part of the regular diet of commercial proceedings seen by the Cayman Island courts. Having been revised as recently as 2013, Cayman Islands company law on the standing of those able to bring winding up proceedings was recently tested at both trial and appeal.

The first instance decision of Justice Mangatal, to strike out a winding up petition presented by certain limited partners of Rhône Holdings LP, a Cayman Islands' exempted limited partnership (ELP) governed by the Exempted Limited Partnership Law 2014 (ELP Law), was the first time the Grand Court had enforced Section 95(2) of the Cayman Islands Companies Law (2013 Revision).

The Companies Law provides for the dismissal or adjournment of the hearing of a winding up petition "on the ground that the petitioner is contractually bound not to present a petition against the company". In December 2015, the Cayman Islands Court of Appeal unanimously held that the petition was contrary to an express provision requiring them not to do so, found in the limited partnership agreement, and refused to grant the petitioners leave to appeal out of time on the basis that the appeal had no reasonable prospect of success.

Enforceable clauses

To the extent that there was any debate, the decision has now made it clear that clauses within a limited partnership agreement providing that a limited partner shall not petition to wind up a partnership are enforceable and will be upheld by a court.

This matter found itself before the Court of Appeal by way of an application seeking leave to appeal out of time against the first instance decision of Mangatal J to dismiss a winding up petition presented against Rhône Holdings. In that case, clause 5.12 of the limited partnership agreement provided that the limited partners were contractually bound not to present such a petition and that, as a consequence, section 95(2) of the Companies Law, it was argued, the petition should be dismissed.

As the appeal was brought out of time, the appellants had to convince the court that the appeal would stand a reasonable prospect of success. The appellants submitted that the appeal did indeed stand a reasonable prospect of success on the grounds that section 35(g) of the ELP Law was inconsistent with section 95(2) of the Companies Law. Consequently, section 95(2) of the Companies Law should not be applied in respect of a partnership; and even if the statutory provisions were not considered to be inconsistent, then section 95(2) of the Companies Law should in any event be ignored on the grounds that an agreement not to present a petition against an ELP would be contrary to public policy.

The arguments put forward by the appellants were given short shrift, with the judgment of Sir Bernard Rix, JA describing them as "simply impossible".

Inconsistency in the statutory provisions

The ELP Law itself does not afford any power to wind up a partnership on the basis that it is just and equitable to do so. However, section 36(3) of the ELP Law expressly incorporates Part V of the Companies Law, which is entitled to do so, under 'Winding up of Companies and Associations' and includes section 95(2) which states that the court will dismiss a winding up petition on the ground that a petitioner is contractually bound not to present a petition against a company.

The appellants submitted that these provisions were contrary to section 36(3)(g) of the ELP Law, which provides that on application by a partner, the court may wind up a partnership on the basis that it is just and equitable to do so. It was said by the appellants that absent an express provision along the lines of section 95(2) of the Companies Law, the court could not dismiss a petition presented in this way.

The Court of Appeal disagreed, noting that the actual power to wind up on just and equitable grounds was not actually found in the ELP Law, but in the underlying provisions of Part V of the Companies Law; a point ultimately conceded by the appellants. The Court of Appeal held that if the legislature had not intended section 95(2) of the Companies Law to apply to the ELP then they would have expressly excluded it.

Is an agreement not to petition contrary to public policy?

By way of alternative, the appellants submitted that even if there was no inconsistency as between the ELP Law and Companies Law, section 95(2) of the Companies Law should be ignored on the basis that an agreement not to petition against an ELP would be contrary to public policy.

This submission was not accepted by the Court of Appeal which noted that a petition brought contrary to an agreement not to do so actually represented the public policy of legislators in the Cayman Islands. Indeed, that was the exact reason why section 95(2) had been enacted.

Consequences of Rhône Holdings

It is now irrefutable that the judiciary in the Cayman Islands will uphold an express contractual agreement between limited partners not to wind up a limited partnership. However, there remains a question as to what the Grand Court would do with an agreement that was not so clear in its terms.

Clause 5.12 of the agreement in Rhône Holdings was clear in its terms, providing that: "The parties agree not to cause:

  1. An involuntary proceeding to be commenced or an involuntary petition to be filed seeking:

    1. winding up, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization, or other relief in respect of the Partnership or Rhône II under any bankruptcy, insolvency, receivership or similar law of any jurisdiction now or hereafter in effect or
    2. the appointment of a receiver, trustee, custodian, sequestrator, liquidator, administrator, conservator, or similar official for the Partnership or Rhône II, or
  2. The Partnership or Rhône II to

    1. voluntarily commence any proceeding or file any petition seeking winding up, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or other relief under any bankruptcy, insolvency, receivership or similar law of any jurisdiction now or hereafter in effect,
    2. consent to the institution of, or fail to contest in a timely and appropriate manner, any proceeding, application or petition described in clause (a) above,
    3. apply for or consent to the appointment of a receiver, trustee, custodian, sequestrator, liquidator, administrator, conservator or similar official for the Partnership or Rhône II or for a substantial part of any of its assets,
    4. file an answer admitting the material allegations of a petition filed against it in any such proceeding,
    5. make a general assignment for the benefit of creditors or (6) take any action for the purpose of effecting any of the foregoing."

Clause 5.12 of Rhône Holdings' limited partnership agreement was nothing if not comprehensive. It is abundantly clear in its terms in that it prevents the limited partners from taking steps to wind up the partnership. The Court of Appeal has now confirmed that this is entirely permissible and this is clearly a correct representation of the law, and the correct policy; one of the attractions of the jurisdiction is that sophisticated investors should be permitted to contractually define their relationship.

However, Rhône Holdings does beg the question as to what a court would do when faced with a limited partnership agreement, that is not as expansive as the clause set out above.

It is commonplace for a limited partnership agreement to have provisions providing for the termination of a partnership (such as the effluxion of time). It is not so common to see a provision in the terms of clause 5.12.

What then, if there is no clause along the lines of clause 5.12 prohibiting the partners from petitioning, but no express provision providing that a partnership can be terminated following a winding up order made by the court? Have the limited partners impliedly contracted out of their ability to petition to wind up the partnership of the just and equitable basis?

The weight of opinion suggests, should limited partners wish to exclude their ability to petition to wind up a partnership on the just and equitable ground, then they must do so expressly.

This must follow given the number of cases on which a petition has been presented on the just and equitable basis and has not been struck out even though a just and equitable winding up is not listed as one of the occasions on which the partnership will be terminated. The statutory ability to wind up will in all likelihood trump a silent partnership agreement.

And what about the limited liability company?

Late last year, the Cayman Islands legislature passed a bill to allow a new type of vehicle to be legally incorporated; the limited liability company (LLC). The Limited Liability Companies Law 2016 has now been enacted and was brought into force on 8 July, 2016.

As is envisaged by the law, an LLC will, in essence, be a hybrid of an exempted limited company and an ELP . It is important to note here that members of an LLC are generally free to govern their relationship with each other however they should wish, as long as it is documented in the LLC agreement.

It is interesting to note that the legislature has dealt with the winding up of an LLC in the exact same way that it dealt with the winding up of a partnership. Section 37 of the Bill expressly incorporates the provisions of Part V of the Companies Law. It also contains a provision (section 37(1)(f ) in near identical terms to section 36(3)(g) of the ELP Law), which will permit the court to order the winding up of an LLC on the basis that it is just and equitable to do so.

It would, therefore, appear clear that, should the facts in Rhône Holdings be replicated for an LLC, the court would take the exact same approach and uphold the contractual bargain made between the members of the LLC, and prevent any member from acting contrary to that agreement by striking out any petition presented with reference to section 95(2) of the Companies Law. Given the flexibility of the LLC structure and the ability of members to contract as between themselves, this is clearly the correct approach.

This article was first published in CDR, Volume 7, Issue 4, July-August 2016.

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

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

Ben Hobden
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Maples and Calder
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
Maples and Calder
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
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
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
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 (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

To Use 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.


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.


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