Chase Cambria
  • Log in
  • Not a member yet?
go
  • Contact
  • Webmail
  • Archive
 
  • Home
  • Overview
  • Journal Issues
  • Special Issues
  • Subscriptions
  • Editorial Board
  • Author Guidelines

International Corporate Rescue

Journal Issues

  • Vol 1 (2004)
  • Vol 2 (2005)
  • Vol 3 (2006)
  • Vol 4 (2007)
  • Vol 5 (2008)
  • Vol 6 (2009)
  • Vol 7 (2010)
  • Vol 8 (2011)
  • Vol 9 (2012)
  • Vol 10 (2013)
  • Vol 11 (2014)
  • Vol 12 (2015)
  • Vol 13 (2016)
  • Vol 14 (2017)
  • Vol 15 (2018)
  • Vol 16 (2019)
  • Vol 17 (2020)
  • Vol 18 (2021)
  • Vol 19 (2022)
  • Vol 20 (2023)
  • Vol 21 (2024)
  • Vol 22 (2025)
  • Vol 23 (2026)
  •         Issue 1
  •         Issue 2
  •         Issue 3

Vol 23 (2026) - Issue 3

Article preview

When Meetings Turn Contentious: Navigating Offshore Corporate Control Battles

John Crook, Partner, and Robert Gregory, Counsel, Walkers, Hong Kong

Synopsis
There has been a marked increase in contested shareholder meetings in offshore‑incorporated companies, particularly those domiciled in the British Virgin Islands (the 'BVI'), Bermuda and the Cayman Islands.
A familiar pattern has emerged: after a period of 'wait‑and‑see', investors have resumed activism with fresh intensity. Macroeconomic uncertainty, compressed valuations and the pervasive gap between trading prices and perceived intrinsic value have operated to focus shareholder attention on cash and/or asset rich vehicles. This is fertile ground for stakeholders to adopt competing visions of corporate strategy and, with it, comes battles for control of the boardroom, and subsequent actions may involve asset tracing, information collection and control issues and restructuring
arrangements.
The canonical fact pattern involves a company incorporated offshore with global operations and assets, sometimes listed (e.g. in the United States or Hong Kong), but sometimes privately‑ and closely‑held, with two 'sides' forming: one side, founder‑led and management‑aligned, arguing for strategic patience with a long‑term strategy for growth; the other side, activist investor or creditor group‑led, identifying a shorter term value‑extraction opportunity, which involves lobbying other shareholders for support and pushes for monetisation – that is, asset realisation via sales, buy‑backs, special dividends or liability management transactions – and/or allegations of mismanagement or misconduct often also feature. When one side's at
tempts at persuasion fail, control becomes the prize:
incumbent directors seek to remain in office; the activist group will seek to requisition (directly, or through the appointment of receivers) an extraordinary share holder meeting to replace the board. What follows is a compressed procedural struggle: in the boardroom, through proxy solicitors and depository chains, on the meeting floor, and ultimately in court.

Buy this article
Get instant access to this article for only EUR 55 / USD 60 / GBP 45
Buy this issue
Get instant access to this issue for only EUR 175 / USD 230 / GBP 155
Buy annual subscription
Subscribe to the journal and recieve a hardcopy for
EUR 730 / USD 890 / GBP 560
If you are already a subscriber
log In here

International Corporate Rescue

"International Corporate Rescue is a must-have of the most current substantive law developments in restructuring and insolvency law. Covering legislative overviews and novelties, case reviews and analyses of cross-border controversies, it is a concise, accessible and insightful collection of leading articles from respected lawyers and academics from all over the world."

Prof. Em. Bob Wessels, University of Leiden, Leiden

 

 

Copyright 2006 Chase Cambria Company (Publishing) Limited. All rights reserved.