British Islands meaning

When and why is a foreign law legal opinion needed? A foreign law legal opinion is called for when lenders engage in cross-border lending, and they usually insist on opinions from counsel in every pertinent jurisdiction. Take, for instance, a deal in which the facility agreement and other finance documents are governed by the law of England and Wales, the borrower or another obligor is incorporated in the British Virgin Islands (BVI), and some security assets are located in Jersey. In that case, the lender will expect legal opinions from lawyers in England and Wales, the BVI, and Jersey, in each of relevant jurisdictions involved in it...

Direct Investments Ltd (a company in receivership incorporated in the British Virgin Islands) v Mittal-Goenka [2026] EWHC 460 (Comm) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling illustrates that a party cannot sidestep an earlier case management direction by claiming circumstances have shifted, or by repackaging the order of issues, simply by altering its stance at all. Where the court has ordered particularisation of foreign law, that requirement stands unless successfully appealed or varied. A litigant who pleads foreign law but does not pinpoint the precise principles relied on risks being barred from pursuing the argument at all. The court further made clear that FS Cairo (Nile Plaza) LLC v Brownlie [2021] UKSC 45 neither dispenses with proper pleadings nor permits postponement of particularisation. In practical terms, once foreign law is put in play, it must be stated with clarity, and any case management order addressing it is binding unless and until it is formally reconsidered. What was the background? The claimant, Direct Investments...

Telecom Business Solution, Llc v Terra Towers Corp No. 22-1761, SD NY, 2025 US Dist US Judge Lewis A. Kaplan of the Southern District of New York has imposed coercive sanctions: US$10,000 per day to begin against certain parties in May 2025, and US$20,000 per day against other parties starting in June 2025, with each fine set to double every fourteen days until the contempt is cured. Telecoms dispute The dispute centres on a shareholders agreement (SHA) binding the shareholders and investors in Continental Towers LATAM Holdings Ltd, a telecommunications infrastructure company that owns and operates telecommunication towers and related assets across Latin America. The minority investors are Telecom Business Solution Llc and LATAM Towers Llc—both Delaware entities backed and financed by Peppertree Capital Management—and AMLQ Holdings (Cay) Ltd, a Cayman Islands entity funded by Goldman Sachs & Co Llc (collectively, the petitioners). The majority holders are Terra Towers Corp, a British Virgin Islands entity, and TBS Management SA, a Panamanian company (together, Terra), together with DT...

A Introduction This paper explores whether running parallel schemes of arrangement is either required or desirable when implementing cross-border restructurings for companies incorporated in an offshore jurisdiction (namely the Cayman Islands, Bermuda or the British Virgin Islands (‘BVI’)) whose principal operations or assets, in substance, lie predominantly within an onshore jurisdiction (specifically Hong Kong or the People’s Republic of China). The issue emerges from certain obiter observations made by Deputy High Court Judge William Wong SC in Da Yu Financial Holdings Ltd [2019] HKCFI 2531 (not reported by LexisNexis®), a case that concerned parallel and inter-conditional schemes of arrangement advanced in both the Cayman Islands and in Hong Kong in respect of a Cayman-incorporated company whose principal place of business, and only significant asset, were situated in Hong Kong. While approving the Hong Kong scheme, Deputy Judge accepted the necessity of ‘ensuring that scheme creditors cannot derail the orderly working of the scheme by mounting hostile proceedings against the Company in its place of incorporation’....

Practice Note: Service of applications and documents in family proceedings outside the jurisdiction of England and Wales This Practice Note sets out guidance on serving applications for matrimonial or civil partnership orders, and other family proceedings documents, beyond England and Wales. It addresses service in Scotland or Northern Ireland, in states party to the Hague Service Convention, and in all remaining countries, for proceedings started on or after 6 April 2022. It outlines the deadlines for service and for acknowledging service of matrimonial and civil partnership applications, and also considers when a translation is required. For proceedings issued before 6 April 2022, see Practice Note: Service of documents in family proceedings outside the jurisdiction (pre-DDSA 2020). For provisions on serving court documents within the EU before implementation period (IP) completion day (11 pm on 31 December 2020), see: Service on a party in an EU Member State before IP completion day. The rules governing service of application forms/notices and other documents outside the jurisdiction of England and Wales, together...

This Practice Note offers an overview of trusts in the British Virgin Islands (BVI). For broader BVI background, see Practice Note: Private Client—British Virgin Islands—Q&A guide. The principal legislation is the Trustee Ordinance (Cap 303, Law of BVI), as amended (TO), and the Virgin Islands Special Trusts Act 2003, as amended (VISTA Law). The texts are available via the further reading links to Spitz & Clarke Offshore Service in the related documents pod and on the BVI FSC—Legislation web page. Types of trusts The most frequently used BVI trusts include: discretionary trusts VISTA trusts life interest trusts fixed interest trusts Discretionary trusts A discretionary trust typically affords maximum flexibility and is the most commonly adopted and, in many cases, the most effective arrangement for both settlor and beneficiaries. Trustees are granted wide discretion regarding when distributions are made, in what amounts, and to which beneficiaries, from both income and capital. This structure is particularly valuable where, at establishment,...

The framework governing trusts in the British Virgin Islands (BVI) is set out in the Trustee Act (as amended) (Cap 303, Laws of the BVI) together with the Virgin Islands Special Trusts Act 2003, as amended (the VISTA Law). Trusts formed under the VISTA Law (VISTA Trusts) commonly hold shares, whether directly or through holding structures, in operating companies rather than purely passive investment vehicles, often trading in fields unfamiliar to the trustee and regularly located at a distance from the BVI. Addressing such demanding circumstances was the very reason the VISTA Law was designed and enacted, which in turn makes VISTA Trusts a highly effective tool within international wealth structuring. This Practice Note considers selected aspects of the management and administration of VISTA Trusts. Separation of trust and corporate governance The VISTA Law acknowledges that trustees are seldom natural entrepreneurs...

ARCHIVED : This Precedent has been archived and is not maintained . SIAC ARBITRATION NO. [ ] OF 2015 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION BETWEEN Parties WEIPA RESOURCES LIMITED — Claimant SELANGOR RESOURCES SDN BHD — Respondent 1 The Claimant, Weipa Resources Limited (Claimant), is a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands, with its registered office at P.O. Box 1234, Charlotte Street, Tortola, British Virgin Islands. 2 The Respondent, Selangor Resources Sdn Bhd (Respondent), is a company incorporated in Malaysia, with its registered address at 20-02, 500 Federal Plaza, Petaling Jaya, Selangor. 3 Pursuant to a written agreement made on or about 15 August 2014 between the Respondent and the Claimant (the ‘Contract’), the Claimant agreed to purchase, and the Respondent agreed to sell, 20,000 metric tonnes (plus or minus 5% at the Claimant’s option) of low sulphur delayed coking petroleum sponge coke (the ‘Product’). The Contract is governed by the law of Aleutia. 4...

SIAC ARBITRATION NO.[ ] OF 201[ ] IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION BETWEEN: Parties WEIPA RESOURCES LIMITED Claimant SELANGOR RESOURCES SDN BHD Respondent The Claimant, Weipa Resources Limited (Claimant), is a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands, with its registered address at P.O. Box 1234, Charlotte Street, Tortola, British Virgin Islands. The Respondent, Selangor Resources Sdn Bhd (Respondent), is a company incorporated in Malaysia, with its registered address at 20-02, 500 Federal Plaza, Petaling Jaya, Selangor. By a written agreement made on or about 15 August 2014 between the Respondent and the Claimant (the Contract), the Claimant agreed to buy and the Respondent agreed to sell 20,000 metric tonnes (plus or minus 5% at the Claimant’s option) of low sulphur delayed coking petroleum sponge coke (the Product). The governing law of the Contract is the law of [ insert applicable law ]. A copy of the Contract is enclosed herewith, as Annex SOC-1. ...