Henderson J
1 IN THE GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS GEORGE TOWN, GRAND CAYMAN
CAUSE NOS. 238/6, 241/6
ER OF THE COMPANIES LAW (2004 REVISION)
IARTER OF UNIVEST MULTI-STRATEGY FUND TRUST (LIQUIDATION)
06, 239/06, 240/06,
6, 242/06, 243/06,
244/06 & 245/06
D
15
16
AND:
17
18
AND:
19
20
21
22
AND:
23
24
25
AND:
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 Appearances: N RSM RICHTER INC.
RAYMOND MASSI
CLIFFORD CULMER
SIMON WHICKER
KEITH BLAKE
(In Voluntary Liquidation))
Mr. Kyle Broadhurst of Broadhurst Barristers for the
Applicants
Respondents
e Applicants
34
35
36
37
38
39
Ms.
40
(I)
41
42
Before: H
43
44
45
46 Heard: S
Judgment - In Re Univest
MS Richter Inc., Raymond Massi and Clifford Cul-
r, Sam Dawson of Solomon Harris for the Joint Voluntary
Liquidators
Mr. Nick Robinson of Walkers for Univest Diversified) Ltd.
on . Justice Henderson
September 13, 2006
Multinational Cayman Fund Ltd. (In Voluntary Liquidation) Cause Nos. 238/06 to 245/06
er
untary
Fund
14 of 97
1
2
3
4
5
6 There are three
7 Massi and Cliff
8 them in these ca
9 further affidavit
out the original
JUDGEMENT
applications before me: an application by RSM Richter
rd Culmer for leave to amend the eight originating sum
issued in application by the same parties for an extension
and an application by the Joint Voluntary Li-
g summarises.
Inc, Raymond
monses filed by
or one to file
uidators to strike
11
12 The Joint Voluntary
13 in the liquidation
14 Debtor company
15 Univest Limited
16 several corporate
companies.
17
18
19 The Creditor con-
temporary Liquidators ("JVLs"), Simon Whicker and Keith B.
of eight corporate entities to which I will refer collect-
s, Msrs. Massi and Culmer are Joint Official Liqui-
dation companies; I shall refer collectively to these entities as the
20 JVLs.
21 of the eight Debtors
22 as "creditors". It
23 indebted to [the CJ
24 $100,000,000.00]
25 amendment or pa-
26 that the debt is sti-
Judgment - In Re Univest
tuation. The proof of claim is in the most general of term
for companies as "debtors" and it names each of the CJ
Colleges that "the debtors (individually and/or collective
creditor companies) in the aggregate sum of approximate
Canadian Dollars (CDN $100,000,000.00), subject to a
tition between the [Creditor companies] (the "debt")".
27 I due and owing is made "subject to further investigation."
Authority: Univest Fund Ltd. (In Voluntary Liquidation) Cause Nos. 238/06 to 245/06
28 It names each
ditor companies
by) were
ely
adjustment,
The assertion
on, analysis and
14/2007
1 review' and to
2 purpose of the c
3
4 n
5 r
6 i
7 c
8 l
9 o
10 11
No further parties.
The debt relates to and results from inter alia, investments made by the [Creditor companies] and or redemption remade by and on behalf of such entities in respect of their investments in the debtors and/or management and other due by the [Creditor companies] and/or transfers of finance, financial support, etc. made or granted debt by the [Creditor companies]."
Liquidation is given. There is no assertion of particular
si. As to the
its.
quests
fees
insiers,
o n
debts owing by
13 specific debtors
14
15 The claim was for
16 rejection; in eff
17
18 The Grand Court
19 liquidation of an
20 Insolvency Rule
21 law or such other
22 102 rule 17.
to specific creditors.
subject, the originating summonses ask for orders set
et, this is an appeal from the decision of the JVLs.
Rules provide that "all proceedings concerning or aris-
ing company shall, so far as practicable, be made in acco
1986 (SI 1986/1925), insofar as such rules are not in-
rding as may be applied to the proceeding in question".
ng aside the
ng out of the
dance with the
consistent with the
of the Order
23
24 The Insolvency
25 proof of debt (see
26 that a claim will
27 particular named
28 of scrutiny by the
29 of the individual
Judgment - In Re Univest
rules 1986 specify certain matters which must be stated.
Insolvency Rules 1986, section 4.75). The rules con-
tinue to be made by a specific, named corporate entity against the
entity; a "rolled up" claim is too general to permit the
liquidators. The creditor's proof of debt must specify
claim, whether or not the amount includes outstanding
Mutual Energy Fund Ltd. (In Voluntary Liquidation) Cause Nos. 238/06 to 243/06
in a creditor’s
implicate clearly
the assets of a
appropriate level
the total amount
uncapitalized
14/06/07
1 interest, particular
2 held, and certain
3 the existence of
4 established practice
5 under court super
6
7 The proof of debt
of how and when the debt was incurred, particulars of how and when the debt was incurred, particulars
other matters. The rules contemplate that documents in the Cayman Islands, whether or not the liquidation
he debt will be identified in the proof of debt. These rules in the Cayman Islands, whether or not the liquidation
vision.
is carried out
8 no further com-
9
10 I therefore conclu-
11 merit and will ne-
12 summonses is str
13 The application of
14
15 I accept the cont-
16 companies by this
17 possession to submit is necessary. Given its form, the JVLs had no optio-
n that the appeal against the rejection of the claim is
18 ceasarily fail. In light of that finding, I order that each
lack out on the ground that they disclose no reasonable
or an extension of time to file further evidence is dismi-
nted by the JVLs that no prejudice has been occasioned as a result. At present, those companies have little or no e-
port the existence of a debt or debts. However, they han but to reject it.
entirely without
of the originating
cause of action.
ssed.
It is the Creditor
evidence in their
ve obtained an
18 order of this court
19 documents sup-
20 JVLs under oath.
21 documentary evi-
22 fresh proofs of de-
23
(
Judgment - In Re Univest
on August 24, 2006 requiring the JVLs to make disclo-
suring the existence of such debts and permitting the ex-
If and when the Creditor companies come into posses-
sence supporting the existence of a debt or debts, they v-
not in the proper form.
sure of any
elimination of both
ion of
will be able to file
14/2006
1 Since August 24
2 was granted ex p
3 Ontario. The JV
4 section four of the
5 manner of giving
6 August 24, 2006
7
s court, which
art of Justice of
order under
rections as to the
ents. The order of
8 During oral argu-
9 disclosure by the
10 do so. I therefor
11 following. The
12 court as provision
13 have a special ob-
14 manner. I must
15 the order of Aug-
16 an order for direc-
17 order was obtained, I endeavoured to make a directions order intende-
JVIs in a timely manner. The JVIs took objection to
tain from making an order for directions, but wish
VJLs, Mssrs. Whicker and Blake, have received appoin-
that and official liquidators in other cases. As officers of
ligation to ensure that orders of the court are complied
express some disappointment that they have not done so, and some further disappointment with their rela-
tions even though, technically, the proceeding in which
tion is not before me.
It to expedite
my jurisdiction to
add the
ments from this
of this court, they
with in a timely
with respect to
action to accept
the August 24th
18
19 Dated this 14th day
20
21
Hend-
22
23 Henderson, J.
24 Judge of the Grand
Judgment - In Re Unives-
City of September, 2006
and Court
Mutual Regency Fund Ltd. (In Voluntary Liquidation) Cause Nos. 238/06 to 245/07
14/06/06