• wblogo
  • wblogo
  • wblogo

Cayman's recent fund governance SORP

Neal Lomax, Mourant Ozannes, Partner, Cayman Islands, 29 January 2014

articleimage

The Cayman Islands Monetary Authority's recently-published statement of guidance on matters of fund governance has taken effect and applies to all funds regulated under the terms of the Mutual Funds Law.

The Cayman Islands Monetary Authority's recently-published statement of guidance on matters of fund governance has taken effect and applies to all funds regulated under the terms of the Mutual Funds Law. Neal Lomax of Mourant Ozannes tell us how.

The statement establishes key principles of good governance which must be observed by funds which CIMA regulates. Many funds will not be phased by the requirements of the statement for their governance models will exceed the standards which the statement demands, though others may find the statement challenging and should seek to improve their governance standards accordingly. 

The statement is neither rigid nor prescriptive (and not exhaustive either). Instead, it sets out key principles to be interpreted and applied in the specific context of each fund, taking into account factors such as the fund's structure, complexity and size. It aims its requirements at the 'governing body' of a fund (I.e. its governing mind and will and the body responsible for overseeing and supervising the activities and affairs of the fund) as well as at its 'operators' (i.e. the members who, together, comprise the fund's governing body).

Beyond fiduciary duties: a regulatory overlay 

It is clear from the statement that CIMA seeks to ensure that fund governance not only becomes a focus beyond common law fiduciary duties but also that it is contextually relevant. CIMA also wishes to reaffirm who bears responsibility for governance and concedes that its supervisory glare falls upon a broad community (hence the different treatment in the statement of the fund's operators from its governing body) which must have regard to broader principles than those established as rules of common law or guidelines established in Weavering Macro Fixed Income Fund Limited (in liquidation) v Stefan Peterson and Hans Ekstrom (2011).

The oversight principle. The requirement of the statement for effective supervision and oversight of a fund's activities and affairs by its governing body is entirely consistent with the general requirements of supervision imposed by common law (and highlighted in the Weavering judgment as being absent in the case of the Weavering fund). In many ways this is at the heart of the statement and underpins the other principles which it establishes, and includes a requirement that the governing body of a fund should meet at least twice per year or more frequently if the circumstances of the fund require it to do so in order to fulfill its responsibilities effectively.

The documents principle. The statement highlights the need for funds to ensure that they provide investors with accurate and sufficient disclosure of matters such as the fund's investment strategy, relevant conflicts of interests and descriptions of the equity interests being offered to investors. In large measure these replicate the requirements of the Mutual Funds Law, though the statement goes further in requiring that internal documents are maintained which record fully, accurately and clearly the proceedings at meetings of the fund's governing body.

The communication principle. The statement notes that communication between the operators of a fund and its service-providers (as well as between funds and CIMA) should contain reports about compliance with the rules of the fund as well as with applicable law and regulation and should also allow investors to see this information whenever disclosure to them is appropriate.

The risk management principle. the statement requires a fund's risks to be appropriately managed and mitigated and discussed at the (at least) biannual meetings of the fund's governing body.

The enforcement dilemma

The statement may be a double-edged sword for CIMA; much as it encourages good governance among fund operators and governing bodies, investors are bound to expect that compliance with it will be policed and shortcomings dealt with. Whether CIMA will in fact do this remains to be seen; for the time being, it lacks a specific statutory right of enforcement in the event of failure by fund operators and governing bodies to adhere to the terms of the statement. However, any conclusions which CIMA reaches about bad behaviour will colour the way it exercise its of its statutory power of substitution where fund operators fall short of what CIMA considers to be fit and proper.

Action this day! 

We encourage fund operators to review the detail of the statement and to ascertain where, if at all, they fall short in their current practices, whether individually or collectively as governing bodies. The statement is not a panacea and compliance may not be enough in certain instances, but at least CIMA is sticking up for the interests of high-net-worth investors. 

Good practice always entails rigorous communication between funds and their service providers and that includes the manner in which meetings of each fund's governing body are arranged, conducted and recorded. Furthermore, fund operators should consider the state of their funds' documents to ensure that they comply with the requirements of the statement.

*Neal Lomax is the managing partner in Mourant Ozannes' Cayman office. He can be reached on +1 345 814 9131 or at neal.lomax@mourantozannes.com

Latest Comment and Analysis

Latest News

Award Winners

Most Read

More Stories

Latest Poll