Jersey Court Gives Much Awaited Verdict on Pantrust Scam

By in

The Jersey Court’s decision in Heinriches v Pantrust 2018 gives essential directions on distinguishing the recognition and scope of sham. The case was a piece of a long-running case initiated by the present trustee and recipients of an optional Jersey-law represented trust against Panamanian trust organisation Pantrust Worldwide SA.

The litigants, who had earlier been Trustees to the Brazilian Trust, were blamed for unlawfully removing substantial sums from the Brazilian Trust through secret interest turns, false credits and other illegal transfers.