Among the most debated issues in the funds industry over the last two years are the questions to what extent, and when, can a fund suspend redemptions, and what is the effect on a redeeming investor of a suspension imposed by the fund after the investor’s redemption notice has expired? The recent judgment of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in Culross Global SPC Limited v Strategic Turnaround Master Partnership Limited provides helpful and authoritative guidance about how provisions in a fund’s contractual documentation addressing redemptions and suspensions of redemptions should be interpreted, and how to determine which of the various documents constituting the investment agreement between a fund and its investor should take priority if the documents contain inconsistent provisions. In a guest article, Jeremy Walton, a Partner and the Litigation and Insolvency Practice Group Head at Appleby in the Cayman Islands: outlines the facts of the Strategic Turnaround matter; discusses the lower court decisions and the Privy Council’s legal analysis; identifies five practice points for hedge fund industry participants arising out of the Privy Council’s judgment; highlights issues that remain unresolved even after the Privy Council’s judgment; and explores whether the decision may be a Pyrrhic victory for hedge fund investors.