The 150 Year Rule Falls - Cayman Perpetuities Act Changes

Published: 29 Jul 2024
Type: Insight

The Perpetuities (Amendment) Bill, 2024 (Bill) has been passed by the Cayman Islands Parliament and will come into force following royal assent on a date to be appointed by Order of Cabinet and will be known as The Perpetuities Act (2024 Revision) (Act).


The consultation process of the Bill included the membership of STEP Cayman Islands and other local industry representatives, including Appleby, to assist with  producing the  legislation  that will pass into law.

The position in the Cayman Islands before the Act was passed regarding perpetuity periods applicable to trusts was:

  • Trusts that were established on or after 1 August 1995 were subject to a statutory perpetuity maximum period of 150 years[1] alongside the “wait and see” rule. The “wait and see” rule safeguarded against trusts failing by allowing interested persons to wait until the expiry of the perpetuity period to see if a disposition of property has vested or not; and
  • Cayman Islands STAR Trusts are not subject to the rules against perpetuities and therefore can exist in perpetuity[2].

Highlights of the Bill & Choice Given to the Settlor

The Act permits the settlor of a new trust to disapply the rule against perpetuities and to create a perpetual trust. The removal of the mandatory 150-year perpetuity period rule for existing and future trusts[3] (Rule) immediately brings Cayman’s legislation in line with  other established trusts jurisdictions such as the Bahamas, Hong Kong, Jersey and Guernsey. The disapplication of the Rule  further enhances the Cayman Islands top tier position as the global jurisdiction of choice for trusts and trust services.

One of the  notable points  in the disapplication of the Rule is that a settlor now has the option to choose whether or not to disapply the Rule  for a newly settled trust . . If the settlor does not disapply the Rule, the Rule will continue to apply to the newly settled trust which will have a maximum perpetuity period of 150 years as before.

If a new trust is created and the settlor exercises his or her option to forego the Rule, the new trust must meet the following criterion:

  • The trust must not hold or have any interest in land in the Cayman Islands (i.e. Cayman real estate holdings cannot be an asset of a trust that disapplies the Rule).

This real estate holdings caveat to the Rule is a matter of policy which the Cayman Islands Government wished to retain in order to protect the Cayman Islands from any adverse impact that the disapplication of the Rule may have on land holdings held in trust within the Islands. However, it is clear that the vast  majority of assets held in Cayman settled trusts are foreign assets and not Cayman land holdings. This further provides comfort to the residents of the Islands as Cayman land holdings are not being significantly impacted.

Impact on Existing Trust Structures & How the Rule Applies

Under the newly proposed S.20 of the Act, an application to the Grand Court to disapply the Rule to an existing trust may be made by a trustee, settlor, enforcer or a person with a beneficial interest in the trust.  This brings the legislation in line with new trusts disapplying the Rule as explained above. Under S.20(2) of the Act, the Grand Court has  the power to vary the terms of the trust and grant an order in relation to the application to disapply the Rule where the Grand Court is satisfied that it is in the best interests of the beneficiaries or purposes of the trust .

In practice, before the Cayman regime underwent the transition to the proposed Bill, it was important for trust deeds to specify the perpetuity period applicable to a trust (i.e. when the trust would terminate and trust assets would vest). On the ‘vesting date’ the trust assets are distributed to a beneficiary and the  trust period  ends. Where the particular vesting date is fixed for existing trust structures, issues may arise in relation to oncoming taxable events in relation to the vesting date, any charitable structures may also face issues, and family estate planning goals may be interrupted due to the vesting date. The ability to apply to the Court under S.20 to disapply the Rule may greatly assist with any of the foregoing issues, as well as provide peace of mind to keep assets retained within the trust structure indefinitely.

Impact on Change of Governing Law of Trust Structures & How the Rule Applies

The new Bill further allows for established foreign trusts to which the Rule currently does not apply and where the governing law is altered to that of the Cayman Islands to disapply the Rule through an application to the Grand Court. S.89 of the Cayman Islands Trusts Act (2021 Revision) outlines the provisions that relate to governing law and the procedure and validity of selecting the laws of the Cayman Islands to govern the trust[4].

Under S.21 of the Act, if the governing law of the foreign trust meets the following criterion a disposition may be made in accordance with S.89 of the Trusts Act (2021 Revision)[5] upon the application that the Rule shall not apply to the trust:

  • That the governing law of the trust is currently of unlimited duration; and
  • The rule against perpetuities does not currently apply to the trust under its governing law.

Further in line with the overarching intent of protecting land holdings within the Cayman Islands, any land or an interest in land within the Islands will not be subject to the Rule being disapplied by an application brought under S.21.

Appleby Commentary

  1. In terms of jurisdictional comparison, there certainly is a trend to disapply the rule against perpetuities in a number of jurisdictions globally. These include,    jurisdictions such as Bermuda, Jersey, Guernsey and Hong Kong which have abolished them altogether.
  2. The enhancements to the Act work in tandem with the Trusts Act (2021 Revision)[6] and continue to strengthen the Cayman Islands dynamic and flexible trusts legislation as a whole. Additionally, the clear drafting of the new provisions of the Act provide for a practical approach for trust professionals to engage with the legislation.
  3. In practice, Appleby advises a wide variety of clients on trust structuring matters involving the Perpetuities Act, in conjunction with the Trusts Act (2021 Revision)[7]. We are looking forward to the new flexibility that the Act will offer our clients when settling new trusts, potentially altering existing trust structures and when transferring structures to sit under Cayman Islands law in order to take advantage of the ability to extend trust structures into perpetuity.
[1] Perpetuities Act (1999 Revision), S.5(1)
[2]Part VIII Trusts Act (2021 Revision)
[3] Ibid 2
[4] Trusts Act (2021 Revision), S.89
[5] Ibid 5
[6] Trusts Act (2021 Revision)
[7] Ibid 7
Key contacts
Share
More publications
Appleby-Website-Private-Client-and-Trusts-Practice
22 Apr 2026

Regulation, Regulation, Regulation

The article discusses updates to global trust guidance and regulation, as well as beneficial ownership and the regulatory burden on trustees that comes with increased transparency.

Appleby-Website-Corporate-Practice
22 Apr 2026

Prospects of Asian Companies in U.S. Listings in 2026

Nasdaq introduced a series of rule changes in 2025 to raise minimum requirements for public float and offering size for certain new listings.

Website-Code-Cayman
20 Apr 2026

Avoiding The Nuclear Option: Buyout Orders In Just And Equitable Winding Up Proceedings

With the Cayman Islands being a preferred jurisdiction for the incorporation of investment vehicles, inevitably cases will arise where non-controlling shareholders complain that they are being unfairly prejudiced by conduct of those in control, and necessarily pursue those complaints by way of proceedings to wind up the subject company on the just and equitable ground. Where such complaints are well-founded, the outcome will often be an order putting the subject company into official liquidation.  But the Cayman courts also have the jurisdiction in such cases to make a range of other orders as alternatives to taking that nuclear option, and are indeed obliged to consider whether any of those alternative orders would provide a more appropriate solution to the complaints.[1] The Grand Court was recently required to conduct that analysis in the case of Re Position Mobile Ltd SEZC.[2]  The petitioning shareholder in that case had satisfied the Court that it would be just and equitable to wind up the company – since it had justifiably lost confidence in the probity of those in control, due to their serious and sustained misconduct and mismanagement – but positively sought a buyout order[3] as an alternative to a winding up.  The Court thus proceeded to consider whether the buyout order, or any other alternative order, would be more appropriate than ordering a winding up, and concluded that a buyout order was the fairest and most appropriate form of relief in the circumstances of that case. The authors will discuss the guidance which the Position Mobile case provides in that regard below, which should be considered together with the guidance provided by Re Madera Technology Fund (CI) Ltd,[4] particularly in respect of the approach that the Cayman courts can be expected to take when setting the appropriate valuation date for a buyout order, with a view to ensuring that the valuation is fair to each side.[5] [1] See Re Virginia Solution SPC Ltd (unrep. 28 July 2023, CICA) at [61]. [2] [2026] CIGC (FSD) 10 [3] Requiring the respondent shareholders to purchase its shares at a fair price. [4] (unrep. 21 Aug. 2024, Richards J). [5] For further detail, see the authors’ article on the Madera Technology case at https://www.applebyglobal.com/publications/no-looking-back-investor-held-to-buyout-at-current-value-of-shares/.

The Exception To The Rule: Stricter Test Applies Where Granting An Interlocutory Injunction Would Shut Out Trial
7 Apr 2026

No Claim, No Injunction: What Does a Limited Partner Actually Own?

What equitable proprietary interest, if any, does a limited partner hold in the assets of a Cayman Islands exempted limited partnership, and is that interest is sufficient to ground a proprietary injunction? These questions lie at the heart of Parker J’s recent judgment in the matter of Charitable DAF HoldCo, Ltd (in Official Liquidation), in which the Grand Court refused proprietary injunctive relief sought by joint official liquidators against former directors and associated entities. The judgment holds that the Company, as a limited partner in a Cayman ELP, had no equitable proprietary interest in the Fund’s underlying assets of the quality required to found the relief sought. While the court did not exclude the possibility of an LP having proprietary rights in an ELP’s assets, it held that on the particular facts of the case such rights were excluded.

Appleby-Website-Cayman2
30 Mar 2026

The Regulation of Cayman Islands Tokenised Funds – Clear Rules Now in Place

On 5 March 2026 the Virtual Asset (Service Providers) (Amendment Bill), 2026, the Mutual Funds (Amendment) Bill, 2026 and the Private Funds (Amendment) Bill, 2026 were passed by the Parliament of the Cayman Islands with unanimous support, providing welcome clarity that Cayman Islands tokenised funds are regulated within Cayman’s existing Mutual Funds Act (MFA) and Private Funds Act (PFA) framework and do not fall within the scope of the Virtual Asset (Service Providers) Act (VASPA).

Appleby-Website-Regulatory-Practice
19 Mar 2026

Key Regulatory Requirements of SIBA Registered Persons in the Cayman Islands

Registered Persons under the Securities Investment Business Act (Revised) (SIBA) attract regulatory requirements including annual reporting requirements with key filing deadlines falling in January and, typically, December each year. The Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (CIMA)’s recently issued General Industry Notice to the effect that all SIBA Registered Persons will be additionally required to submit a Prudential Information Survey for the 2025 calendar year (by 31 March 2026) has signaled CIMA's continued focus on enhancing the resilience, transparency and prudential soundness of the securities investment business (SIB) sector in the Cayman Islands. Accordingly, this briefing reviews some of the other key regulatory and reporting obligations that attach to Registered Persons under SIBA, CIMA’s associated Rules and Statements of Guidance (SOG), the applicable Anti-Money Laundering Regulations (Cayman AML Regulations) the Tax Information Authority (International Tax Compliance) (Common Reporting Standard) Regulations (Revised) (Cayman CRS Regulations) and, where applicable, The International Tax Co-operation (Economic Substance) Act (Revised) (ES Act).

IWD website preview
9 Mar 2026

International Women’s Day 2026 Roundtable: Rights. Justice. Action. For all women and girls.

As we recognise International Women’s Day 2025, we are reminded that gender equality is not just a vision – it’s a call to action.

Appleby-Website-Regulatory-Practice
3 Mar 2026

Cayman Islands Regulatory Round Up - Winter 2025/26

The round-up provides a concise yet thorough summary of regulatory developments relevant to financial service providers (FSPs) and other stakeholders in the Cayman Islands. It highlights key legislative changes, publications by the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (CIMA), updates on financial sanctions, and anticipates upcoming changes through "horizon scanning”. Links to the underlying CIMA publications, as well as related Appleby published briefings and e-alerts are available throughout this document. The information provided is “as of” 28 May 2025.