82,891
edits
Segregated portfolio company: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
A form of [[espievie]] — seen in the wild in the Cayman Islands, jersey and [[tax haven|places like that]] — where [[limited recourse]] is achieved by operation of the company’s [[constitutive documents]], which segregates the company’s innards into segregated cells, assets in each of which are fully protected from claimants pertaining to other [[cell]]s. While their host [[espievie]] | A form of [[espievie]] — seen in the wild in the Cayman Islands, jersey and [[tax haven|places like that]] — where [[limited recourse]] is achieved by operation of the company’s [[constitutive documents]], which segregates the company’s innards into segregated cells, assets in each of which are fully protected from claimants pertaining to other [[cell]]s. While their host [[espievie]] is its own [[legal person]] able to live, love and enter meaningful contractual relations, the individual [[cell]]s in themselves do not. | ||
The [[cell]]s are recognised under domestic law — important on an insolvency — as being isolated from claims of counterparties who have contracted specifically with other cells. It is a way of achieving [[segregation]] and [[bankruptcy remoteness]] using [[statute]], rather than {{tag|contract}}, {{tag|trust}} and {{tag|equity}}. | |||
Contrast with [[incorporated cell company]], where the cells ''do'' have separate [[legal personality]], and with normal old {{tag|SPV}}s, where you can achieve more or less the same thing contractually with a combination of [[limited recourse]] and [[security]]. | |||
{{seealso}} | {{seealso}} | ||