6,970 judgments 29,205 public-register documents 143,540 judgment pages 132,515 public-register pages 276,055 total pages
Judgment · jid 79

Tasarruf Mevduati Sigorta Fonu v Merril Lynch Bank and Trust Company (Cayman) Limited and others

G 0555 OF 2005 · 2009-Jun-28

No subject summary on file. The PDF contains the full reasoned judgment.

All PDF copies on file (1)

Every PDF we hold for this judgment is listed here, including legacy versions pulled from earlier upstream pipelines. Each carries a provenance note so the source of each copy is explicit.

CSV 13 Apr 2025 CURRENT
1X1L3E5P1RSS1DE60A97C0EF4150D32677A4809F14F98DA291D3.pdf
730.45 KB · md5 a4c75b6e5b12121576824954ea591c7e
Legacy box_files copy — originally downloaded under jid=79 from the now-frozen judicial.ky CSV pipeline (Box.com signed-URL AJAX action=dl_bfile). Kept on disk for reference; the PDB release is the canonical current version. | re-homed from jid=5635 (identity-slide repair 2026-06-12)

Processing-run history (1)

Every time a PDF for this judgment has been put through the AI/OCR pipeline we record what we found. Lets us decide which PDFs to re-process when a better model lands.

MEDIUM 24 May 2026 05:04 · pipeline 0.2.0-akn run #2180 · quality 0.77
Text extraction
pymupdf
2,701 chars in 8 ms
LLM extraction
local · granite4:small-h
parsed first try · 26431 ms
Validation flags (4): cause_number neutral_citation judgment_date court
Full metadata
Full text12 paragraphs Download PDF

Extracted by the canary pipeline from the PDF (PyMuPDF for born-digital pages, vision OCR for scanned ones). Page markers and other machine artifacts are scrubbed for reading; the stored text is never modified. Hover a paragraph for its ¶ permalink. Selectable — Cmd/Ctrl-C copies whatever you've highlighted.

In the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands
Cause No. G 0555 OF 2005
Between
Tasarruf Mevduati Sigorta Fonu
- v -
Merril Lynch Bank and Trust Company (Cayman) Limited and others
Judgment delivered 2009-Jun-28

IN THE GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS CAUSE NO. 555 OF 2005 BETWEEN TASARRUF MEVDUATI SIGORTA FONU PLAINTTIFF AND

MERRIL LYNCH BANK AND TRUST COMPANY (CAYMAN) LIMITED

KAFFEE LIMITED

BARLA FINANCE LIMITED

CUMUR CASH LIMITED .,~.

MEDRO LIMITED

YAHYA MURAT DEMIREL DEFENDANTS CONSOLIDATED BY ORDER DATED 30 MARCH 2007 WITH CAUSE NO. 80 OF 2007 BETWEEN TASARRUF MEVDUATI SIGORTA FONU PLAINTIFF AND 1. MERRIL LYNCH BANK AND TRUST COMPANY (CAYMAN) LIMITED

KAFFEE LIMITED

BARLA FINANCE LIMITED

CUMUR CASH LIMITED

MEDRO LIMITED

YAHYA MURAT DEMIREL DEFENDANTS IN CHAMBERS THE 29TH JUNE 2009 BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ANTHONY SMELLIE APPEARANCES Mr. Russell of Ogier for the plaintiff Mr. McKie for the 1 st to 5th Defendants Mr. Meeson QC for the 6th Defendant RULING 1. TMSF as a lawful judgment creditor has been compelled at every turn to take whatever steps the law allows to obtain satisfaction of its judgment debt. 2. Its latest attempt to do so by seeking the appointment of receivers by way of equitable execution over trust property has failed as against the Trusts, but the obligation is still owed by Mr. Demeril himself. 3. Limited.receivership orders are to be made over any payments out from the Trusts which maybe made for Mr. Demeril's benefit and so to that extent TMSF has had limited success. 4. While it was conceded by Mr Meeson QC on Mr. Demeril's behalf, that such limited orders could be made, that concession came only at the hearing itself when the wider receivership appointment was sought. The concession would have served therefore to avoid only a fraction, and I would think not a very large fraction, of the costs of that contest. 5. As costs remain a matter of discretion, I think that I am allowed to take account of the foregoing factors as against the basic rule that costs usually follow the event, even if the event here were to be defined in terms of Mr. Demeril' s and the Trustee's success in respect of the wider receivership orders which TMSF tried unsuccessfully to obtain: see R v Immigration Board, Ex Parte Kirk Freeport Plaza Ltd: 1996 CILR Note 1. 6. In my view, the costs should be borne as follows: 2 (i) As between TMSF and Mr. Demeril there shall be no order, leaving each ·0s.~ side to bear its own costs (albeit Mr. Demeril is to be allowed from the /\. Trust Fund on the basis of an existing injunctive order). (ii) As between TMSF and the Trustee, the Trustee to have its costs on the ordinary basis, to be taxed if not agreed, with the Trustee being allowed to rely upon its indemnity from the Trust Fund for any balance. 29th June 2009 3

Find similar
Related public-register entries