[11] The Directive called for mandatory application to agreements between parties that were public sector bodies, supervised financial institutions, central counterparties, settlements and clearing houses.

In April 2007, ATT advised CFI that, in its view, there had been events of default under the agreement, and it demanded immediate repayment in full of the outstanding amount of the loan.

ATT rejected the tender, CFI placed the funds in an escrow account, and litigation was commenced in the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court.

In May 2009, the Board dismissed the appeal and ruled that, as a matter of English law: Separately, Cukurova applied to the English Administrative Court to seek permission to impugn the 2003 Regulations on the grounds that they were ultra vires the authority granted under the European Communities Act 1972, as they extended the Directive's application beyond its contemplated purpose.

Following the 2009 ruling, the matter where was returned to the British Virgin Islands commercial court where it came up for hearing before Justice Bannister QC, who held that no event of default had in fact occurred to justify the exercise by ATT of its remedies as secured creditor.

[34]He identified nine areas where it could:[35] In summary, he stated: Nevertheless, the Board emphasises that it is in no way suggesting that equity recognises any general or open-ended discretion.

"[38] As a result of proceedings arising in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York,[e] Cukurova applied to the Privy Council, in a fourth hearing before the Board, to have the final order varied to provide for: The Board was not impressed with ATT's contentions that relief should not be given, observing: The allegations of CH's disposal and non-disclosure of assets to avoid paying Sonera appear on the face of it to be made out, but that is res inter alios acta.

In February 2014, the Board decided that the current suspension of the payment deadline should be continued until such time as the New York Court reaches its decision on the case before it.

While agreeing that several conditions proposed to Alfa appeared sensible (subject to certain modifications), the Board gave both sides until the end of July to take instructions, and allowed interest to continue to run during that time.

[56] It remains to be seen whether the courts will take a robust approach in limiting Cukurova to its own facts,[56] as appropriation provisions have become increasingly common in financial documents.

[59] The complex and turbulent dispute with regard to the control of Turkcell[60] has been supplemented by moves of the Turkish government in August 2013 to appoint directors to its board, which had lacked a quorum since 2010.

However, it is argued that the s. 17(2) framework for the remedy remains conceptually unsound and is unworkable with respect to situations involving chained holding of book-entry securities.