Our lawyers advise clients ranging from global financial institutions leveraging cutting-edge technology, to start-ups changing the status quo with innovative products and services.

Read More

Walkers Launches Compliance Services Offering

Walkers Compliance complements Walkers' legal, corporate and fiduciary services to deliver a one-stop-shop for clients looking to use the Cayman Islands jurisdiction for their business needs.

Read More

Walkers IDR Among Top Global Law Firms in GRR 30

Walkers' Global Insolvency & Dispute Resolution Group has been ranked as the 13th strongest global law firm for restructuring and insolvency by Global Restructuring Review

Read More

Walkers Leads Landmark Defence of Mega-Litigation

Ahmad Hamad Algosaibi Brothers Company (AHAB) v. Saad Investments Company Limited (In Official Liquidation) (SICL) and Others, a case in which claims and counterclaims at their height amounted to over US$17 billion.

Read More

Walkers Leads Offshore

This year Walkers received 10 Band 1 practice rankings in the Chambers and Partners Global Guide, more than any other offshore law firm.

Read More

Walkers Acts on $1B Asia Deal

Walkers BVI and Cayman advised Didi Chuxing on its highly-publicised US$1 billion acquisition of 99 Taxis.

Read More


Following the result in the United Kingdom's EU referendum, Walkers has created a Brexit page dedicated to providing our clients relevant information about the jurisdictions in which we practise.

Read More

Walkers is a leading international law firm. We advise on the laws of Bermuda*, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, Guernsey, Ireland and Jersey.
Powerwomen 200

Walkers in IFC Powerwomen Top 200

Six Walkers lawyers have been ranked in the 2017 edition of CityWealth's IFC Powerwomen Top 200.


More Information

Browse Professionals
by last name

  • A
  • B
  • C
  • D
  • E
  • F
  • G
  • H
  • I
  • J
  • K
  • L
  • M
  • N
  • O
  • P
  • Q
  • R
  • S
  • T
  • U
  • V
  • W
  • X
  • Y
  • Z

Find a Professional
Search by one or more criteria

Avoiding the Nuclear Option

The Cayman Islands Grand Court Appoints Soft Touch Provisional Liquidators to CW Group Holdings Limited

The Grand Court of the Cayman Islands (the “Court”) has appointed ‘soft touch’ provisional liquidators (“PLs”) to the Hong Kong listed company CW Group Holdings Limited (the “Company”) in a contested matter involving two competing applications for the appointment of provisional liquidators, one by the Company (the ‘soft touch’) with a view to promoting a restructuring plan, and the other by certain creditors on a traditional basis (alleging mismanagement or misconduct and the risk of dissipation of assets).

Walkers acted for the Company, as the successful applicant
In making the appointment, the Court emphasised that a key consideration in appointing PLs is to give the Company the necessary breathing space where there is a prospect of promoting a restructuring, finding that: “to allow the company to continue as a going concern and to give the board and its advisors the best possible opportunity to secure a favourable restructuring is … in the best interests of the body of general creditors as a whole.” This is an important decision, as the Court has confirmed that: (a) the appointment of PLs on a soft touch basis may be done in proceedings initiated by a “friendly” creditor, notwithstanding the objection of other creditors; (b) the relevant law does not require the applicant to have a formulated restructuring plan in advance before making an application for soft touch PLs; and (c) the appointment of PLs on a traditional basis must be “necessary” as required by the statute.

The background to the proceedings was significant because prior to the Cayman Islands application, the Company (and certain affiliates) had sought and obtained a moratorium by filing proceedings in Singapore, and a subsidiary of the Company had also had different PLs appointed in Hong Kong on a traditional basis. Notwithstanding that a stay was in effect as a matter of Singapore law, a creditor of the Company proceeded to file a winding up petition in the Cayman Islands, arguing that an injunction or stay in Singapore (which is not the place of incorporation) does not have any effect in the Cayman Islands.


Click to view advisory

UCITS Collateral Requirements for Securities Lending Transactions

In September 2017, the European Securities and Markets Authority (“ESMA”) launched a peer review on its Guidelines on ETFs and other UCITS issues (the “Guidelines”). The aim of the peer review, conducted by an independent group of experts, was to assess compliance by 6 jurisdictions, including Ireland, with a subsection of the Guideline’s requirements relating to efficient portfolio management techniques (“EPM”), including securities lending. On 30 July 2018, following completion of the peer review, ESMA published its report setting out findings regarding compliance, identifying good practices and policy considerations for follow-up by ESMA.

The peer review was positive in relation to Ireland and found it to have a “well-structured and robust process around the use of EPM by UCITS”. Ireland was also highlighted as having in place a number of good practices including the issuance by the Central Bank of Ireland (the “Central Bank”) of guidance and Q&As to assist UCITS in addressing the EPM requirements in the Guidelines. However, certain breaches by other jurisdictions of the Guidelines were specified in ESMA’s report including of the requirement that all revenues arising from EPM should be returned to the UCITS, net of direct and indirect operational costs and that these costs should not include hidden revenues. The peer review also found that, notwithstanding the absence of any exemption in the Guidelines, certain other jurisdictions had granted permission to market participants to diverge from the collateral management requirements for EPM.

The peer review group identified a number of policy follow-ups for ESMA which may well be indicative of areas of focus for future guidance from ESMA.


Click to view advisory

Lucy Frew's FinTech Column: July 2018

Lucy Frew shares her views on topical FinTech issues with Practical Law subscribers.

In this edition of her column, Lucy considers the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF) review of the application of its recommendations to cryptoassets and virtual currencies, and considers what actual guidance and regulation has been forthcoming to date from UK and EU regulators to tackle, in particular, the money laundering and terrorist financing risks insofar as they relate to cryptoassets and virtual currencies.

This document was originally published by Practical Law and can be found here.


Click to view aticle

Collective Investment Schemes as UCITS Eligible Assets

Investment by UCITS in other collective investment schemes (“CIS”) is a matter that has recently received attention both domestically and from Europe.

On 5 July 2018, the Central Bank of Ireland (the “Central Bank”) issued a new version of its UCITS Q&A document with a revised Q&A ID1002 on Irish UCITS investment in non-UCITS funds.

Irish UCITS investment in CIS is governed by requirements set out in the Irish UCITS Regulations and the Central Bank UCITS Regulations. The requirements are supported by applicable Q&A issued by the Central Bank. The update to the requirements for UCITS investing in non-UCITS funds was issued via the revised Central Bank Q&A which clarified that “where a UCITS invests in a non-UCITS fund, the constitutional document of the non-UCITS must include a prohibition on investing more than 10% in other investment funds; and that the non-UCITS must be subject to requirements in its jurisdiction of domicile which are equivalent to certain UCITS investor protections. If this is not the case the
non-UCITS fund must have requirements of the same effect in its constitutional document or offering document.” “A statement of the intended investment approach does not constitute a rule for this purpose.”


Click to view advisory

To Stat Demand, or Not To Stat Demand, That is the Question

A Brief Guide and Comparison of Statutory Demands in the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands.

The purpose of this article is to provide a brief guide as to the use of statutory demands (a ‘Demand’ or collectively ‘Demands’) in both the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands (the ‘BVI’). In particular, this article will seek to summarise the basic statutory requirements of Demands in both the Cayman Islands and the BVI, highlight some key differences between the use of Demands in both jurisdictions and provide an overview as to certain strategic considerations when a creditor is contemplating issuing a Demand or a debtor is responding to a Demand.


Click to view article

This article first appeared in Volume 15, Issue 4 of International Corporate Rescue and is reprinted with the permission of Chase Cambria Publishing -

More Articles ...