Sun, Sep 25, 2016
A A A
Welcome Guest
Free Trial RSS
Get FREE trial access to our award winning publications
Industry Updates

In ruling of wide significance, Privy Council decides on Fairfield case

Thursday, April 17, 2014
Opalesque Industry Update - On 16 April 2014, the Privy Council ruled in the claims brought by the liquidators of Fairfield, one of the largest feeder funds to have invested into Bernard Madoff’s investment company. The company filed hundreds of claw back claims against investors who had redeemed shares before the Madoff fraud was uncovered, both in the British Virgin Islands (BVI) and New York. The total value of these claims is in the region of US$7.5 billion.

The BVI Commercial Court and the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal had dismissed the claims on the basis that the redeemers had given good consideration for the payments they received. Not only did the Privy Council unanimously agree with the courts below on good consideration, it also indicated the claims failed on additional grounds under Fairfield’s articles of association. Delivering the judgment Lord Sumption found that the subscription agreement bound the investor and was primarily concerned with representations and warranties on the investments but did not deal with redemptions which were dealt with in the articles of association.

“This Privy Council ruling cements the decisions taken by the BVI Commercial Court and the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal dismissing the Fairfield liquidators’ claims,” said Harneys’ Global Head of Litigation and Insolvency Phillip Kite. “This test case has implications for liquidators of funds in all common law jurisdictions.”

Harneys has acted for a lead group of defendants in the claw back claims brought by the liquidators of Fairfield throughout the years-long process in the BVI courts.

Lord Sumption also reviewed the articles and the redemption procedure together with the information provided by the professional administrator. These included information concerning the Net Asset Value (NAV) from the following:-

  • An investor website;
  • Investor e-mails each month;
  • Contract notes; and,
  • Summary account details.

The Privy Council stated that the good consideration and defence under the articles were closely related and in approving Barclays Bank Limited v. W.J. Simms Son & Cooke (Southern) Ltd (1980) QB 677, said that if a payment made under a mistake discharges a contractual debt of a payee, that sum cannot be recovered unless the mistake is such as to avoid the contract.

Lord Sumption reasoned that Fairfield’s claim to recover the redemption payment would depend on whether it was bound by the redemption terms to make payment which it did make. This in turn depends on whether the effect of those terms is that Fairfield was obliged upon redemption to pay either,

  • The true NAV per share, ascertained in the light of information which subsequently became available about Madoff’s funds, or
  • The NAV per share which was determined by the directors at the time of redemption.

Lord Sumption said that (ii) was the only reasonable conclusion and continued that a certificate had no standard meaning and what constitutes a certificate would depend on the commercial context in which it appeared. A certificate would mean a statement or writing, issued by an authoritative source, communicated to a recipient, in a form which showed it intended to be definitive and the Privy Council found that the monthly e-mails, contract notes and monthly statements would all be certificates within the meaning of the articles.

What do you think?

   Use "anonymous" as my name    |   Alert me via email on new comments   |   
Today's Exclusives Today's Other Voices More Exclusives
Previous Opalesque Exclusives                                  
More Other Voices
Previous Other Voices                                               
Access Alternative Market Briefing

 



  • Top Forwarded
  • Top Tracked
  • Top Searched
  1. Star names struggle as smaller hedge funds make hay[more]

    From eFinancialnews.com: Many big-name funds have been hit by sharp reversals in markets, including US government bonds and UK stocks, and have struggled to extricate themselves from positions that have gone bad. According to data group eVestment, hedge funds below $250 million in size are up 4.1% t

  2. North America - Acela fight splits hedge fund Connecticut and old money enclaves[more]

    From Bloomberg.com: Connecticut’s residential coastline is two worlds, the one of newcomer millionaires and one whose wealth and New England roots span generations. Now, their differences over a rail route threaten to gum up plans for the U.S. Northeast’s fastest-ever trains. About 30 miles from Man

  3. Activist News - Caesars offers creditors another $1.6bn, would spell end of hedge fund ownership, Activist investors double chance of CEO exits[more]

    Caesars offers creditors another $1.6bn, would spell end of hedge fund ownership From Calvinayre.com: Casino operator Caesars Entertainment has improved its offer to junior creditors to over $5b, but the offer is only good until Friday. On Wednesday, Caesars added an extra $1.6b to the $

  4. Comment - ‘Gut feeling’ measurable in hedge fund traders, How hedge fund managers can use blockchain to maximize benefits[more]

    ‘Gut feeling’ measurable in hedge fund traders From Laboratoryequipment.com: “Gut feeling” is an intangible – an automatic hunch – based on prior experience for some people. But the “gut feeling” is actually a measurable response developed in professionals doing some high-risk work, acco

  5. Opalesque Exclusive: Modern investor tools (2): A platform that does the job for you[more]

    Benedicte Gravrand, Opalesque Geneva: A new series on technology providers that assist asset allocators. There is disruption in the investor part of the world of hedge funds, coming from platforms that can replace traditionally-run search and analysis. Here is one of them. L