RE CHAN KA WA JEFFREY

RE CHAN KA WA JEFFREY

The debt of $1,000,000 was due and undisputed, the statutory demand was valid and unmet, the debtor provided no particularized defence or evidence of repayment and had solicitors who signed consent summonses; therefore under s6D(1) of the Bankruptcy Ordinance a bankruptcy order must be made.

Citation
RE CHAN KA WA JEFFREY
Parties
Petitioner: RASTIGNAC (HK) LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 April 2016
Case Number
HCB5348/2015
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Petition / Chambers Hearing/decision
Outcome
Bankruptcy order issued against the debtor.
Legal Topics
Bankruptcy Order, Statutory Demand, Personal Guarantee, Costs Assessment, Estoppel
Source Language
EN
Bankruptcy Insolvency Contract Debt Recovery Bankruptcy Order Statutory Demand Personal Guarantee Costs Assessment +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RASTIGNAC (HK) LIMITED

Petitioner

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Petition / Chambers Hearing/decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a bankruptcy order should be made under section 6D(1) of the Bankruptcy Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the debt of $1,000,000 is due, owing and undisputed
  3. 3 Whether the debtor has any bona fide defence or reasonable prospect of repayment

Ratio Decidendi

The debt of $1,000,000 was due and undisputed, the statutory demand was valid and unmet, the debtor provided no particularized defence or evidence of repayment and had solicitors who signed consent summonses; therefore under s6D(1) of the Bankruptcy Ordinance a bankruptcy order must be made.

Court Disposition

Bankruptcy order issued against the debtor.

Orders

  • Bankruptcy order issued against the debtor pursuant to section 6D(1) of the Bankruptcy Ordinance, Cap 6
  • Costs summarily assessed at HKD 146000 in favour of the petitioner