Segregated portfolio company: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
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]] is its own [[legal person]] able to live, love and enter meaningful contractual relations, the individual [[cell]]s in themselves do not.  
{{a|g|}}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}}.
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}}.