6,967 judgments 29,205 public-register documents 143,540 judgment pages 132,515 public-register pages 276,055 total pages
Judgment · jid 3741 · pdb #4055

Aspect Properties Japan Godo Kaisha v ICG I - Judgment

FSD 0263/2021 (DDJ) · 2021-10-05

Continuation of an ex parte injunction and receivership order at an inter partes mention. Interim Remedies; Civil Procedure; Insolvency (protective receivership)

All PDF copies on file (3)

Every PDF we hold for this judgment is listed here, including legacy versions pulled from earlier upstream pipelines. Each carries a provenance note so the source of each copy is explicit.

PDB 20 May 2026 CURRENT
21-10-05-Aspect-Properties-Japan-Godo-Kaisha-v-ICG-I.pdf
742.49 KB · md5 aae06983925ba90bb36bdfe72f193c8a
Downloaded 2026-05-20 from the new judicial.ky Participants-Database release at https://judicial.ky/n0c-storage/judgments-repository2/21-10-05-Aspect-Properties-Japan-Godo-Kaisha-v-ICG-I.pdf.
CSV 13 Apr 2025 CURRENT
5T2HZUDPT7BD1FDDFG6C1BFEF337547EF7F6A2D1934152190BA0.pdf
742.49 KB · md5 aae06983925ba90bb36bdfe72f193c8a
Legacy box_files copy — originally downloaded under jid=1581 from the now-frozen judicial.ky CSV pipeline (Box.com signed-URL AJAX action=dl_bfile). Kept on disk for reference; the PDB release is the canonical current version. | re-homed from jid=3741 (identity-slide repair 2026-06-12)
CSV 13 Apr 2025 CURRENT
6ADTQTWF5B3E1FDDFFDH7A8FD8F144FE29278FB613FF2EED53F5.pdf
1002.96 KB · md5 496adeeca3652cdaeff07c093a06fd53
Legacy box_files copy — originally downloaded under jid=1580 from the now-frozen judicial.ky CSV pipeline (Box.com signed-URL AJAX action=dl_bfile). Kept on disk for reference; the PDB release is the canonical current version. | re-homed from jid=3741 (identity-slide repair 2026-06-12)

Processing-run history (2)

Every time a PDF for this judgment has been put through the AI/OCR pipeline we record what we found. Lets us decide which PDFs to re-process when a better model lands.

MEDIUM 25 May 2026 04:05 · pipeline 0.2.0-akn run #3328 · quality 0.80
Text extraction
pymupdf
3,867 chars in 11 ms
LLM extraction
local · granite4:3b-h
parsed first try · 22602 ms
Validation flags (3): cause_number judgment_date court
MEDIUM 24 May 2026 07:22 · pipeline 0.2.0-akn run #2401 · quality 0.77
Text extraction
pymupdf
3,867 chars in 10 ms
LLM extraction
local · granite4:small-h
parsed first try · 25465 ms
Validation flags (4): cause_number neutral_citation judgment_date court
Full metadata
Full text8 paragraphs Download PDF

Extracted by the canary pipeline from the PDF (PyMuPDF for born-digital pages, vision OCR for scanned ones). Page markers and other machine artifacts are scrubbed for reading; the stored text is never modified. Hover a paragraph for its ¶ permalink. Selectable — Cmd/Ctrl-C copies whatever you've highlighted.

In the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands — Financial Services Division
Cause No. FSD 0263/2021 (DDJ)
Between
Aspect Properties Japan Godo Kaisha
- v -
ICG I - Judgment
Before
Doyle J
Judgment delivered 2021-10-05

211005 Aspect Properties Japan Godo Kaisha v ICG I – FSD 263 of 2021 (DDJ) – Transcript of Judgment Page 1 of 3 IN THE GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS FINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION CAUSE NO: FSD 263 of 2021 (DDJ) IN THE MATTER OF ORDER 30 RULE 1 OF THE GRAND COURT RULES BETWEEN ASPECT PROPERTIES JAPAN GODO KAISHA Applicant and ICG I Respondent IN CHAMBERS Appearances: Mr Liam Faulkner of Campbells LLP for the Applicant Before: Hon. Justice David Doyle Heard: 24 September 2021 Ex Tempore Judgment Delivered: 24 September 2021 Draft Transcript of Judgment Circulated: 1 October 2021 Transcript of Judgment Approved: 5 October 2021 HEADNOTE Continuation of an ex parte injunction and receivership order at an inter partes mention. 211005 Aspect Properties Japan Godo Kaisha v ICG I – FSD 263 of 2021 (DDJ) – Transcript of Judgment Page 2 of 3 JUDGMENT Introduction

This is a hearing in respect of orders I made on 9 September 2021 granting an injunction in respect of the assets of ICG I (the “Company”) and the appointment of receivers over the assets of the Company. Notice of that hearing was given to Victory Sky Holdings Limited by their attorneys, Appleby, on 7 September 2021.

Today, Liam Faulkner of Campbells has entered an appearance for the Plaintiff/Applicant. The Company has not entered an appearance although Mr Faulkner informs the Court that the Company has been validly served with the Order which was made on 9 September 2021 and will be filing evidence in that respect. Standing

Peter McMaster QC and Zacharie Caudeiron of Appleby have this afternoon attempted to appear, not on behalf of the Company, but on behalf of Lui Guanlin (“Mr Lui”) and state that he “considers himself to be the company’s sole director”. Mr Lui has no standing to appear this afternoon. He is not a party to these proceedings and there has been no appearance entered on behalf of the other party to the proceedings, namely the Company. Indeed, Appleby have been very careful not to enter an appearance on behalf of the Company. Fortification of the undertaking

I have however listened carefully to what Mr McMaster QC has had to say and I have read the Appleby letter dated 23 September 2021 and Mr Lui’s affirmation dated 22 September 2021, filed and served very late in the day. I have not had an opportunity of considering the 292 pages of Exhibit LG-1. I note that Mr Lui does not seek to set aside the Orders made on 9 September 2021 but raises concerns about costs and the enforceability of the undertaking in damages at paragraphs 211005 Aspect Properties Japan Godo Kaisha v ICG I – FSD 263 of 2021 (DDJ) – Transcript of Judgment Page 3 of 3 41 and 42 of his affirmation which he says means that serious consideration ought to be given to whether the undertaking should be fortified.

I have also listened carefully to all that Mr Faulkner had to say on behalf of the Applicant/Plaintiff. Based on what I have read and heard to date, I am not requiring fortification of the undertaking today. Continuation of the Order

I am not going to adjourn this matter to a fixed date. Under paragraph 8 of the Order made on 9 September 2021, any interested party with legal standing may apply to the Court to vary or discharge the Order. I have no such application before me today.

I make an Order in the terms of the draft attached to Mr Faulkner’s email of earlier today, although I think in view of the lack of standing it would not be proper in the Order to have the recitals in connection with Mr Lui or leading counsel for Mr Lui. Mr Lui is not properly before this Court. _______________________________ THE HON. JUSTICE DAVID DOYLE JUDGE OF THE GRAND COURT

Find similar