RE UP ENERGY DEVELOPMENT GROUP LTD

RE UP ENERGY DEVELOPMENT GROUP LTD

The summons to vary the Costs Order was dismissed because the PLs chose to oppose the Petition, their filings were to advance their own contestation rather than to assist the court, and their partisan and unreasonable conduct justified depriving them of the ability to recover the costs they incurred from the company's assets; the original Costs Order stands, with costs of the summons to be paid by the PLs to the Petitioner, taxed if not agreed, with certificate for two counsel.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 1917
Parties
Company: Up Energy Development Group Limited; Petitioner: Petitioner; Joint Provisional Liquidators: Joint Provisional Liquidators of the Company; Opposing Creditor: Integrated Capital (Asia) Limited; Opposing Creditor: China Minsheng Banking Corp., Ltd.; Opposing Creditor: Hao Tian Development Group Limited; Supporting Creditor: Credit Suisse AG, Singapore Branch; Official Receiver: Official Receiver
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 June 2022
Case Number
HCCW91/2016
Procedural Posture
Companies (winding Up) Proceedings / Costs Application to Vary Costs Order; Reasons for Decision on Costs (chambers)
Outcome
Summons dismissed; application to vary Costs Order refused
Legal Topics
Costs, Provisional Liquidators, Comity, Jurisdiction, Winding Up
Source Language
EN
Company Law Insolvency Civil Procedure Cross Border Insolvency Costs Provisional Liquidators Comity Jurisdiction +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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Up Energy Development Group Limited

Company

Petitioner

Petitioner

Joint Provisional Liquidators of the Company

Joint Provisional Liquidators

Integrated Capital (Asia) Limited

Opposing Creditor

China Minsheng Banking Corp., Ltd.

Opposing Creditor

Hao Tian Development Group Limited

Opposing Creditor

Credit Suisse AG, Singapore Branch

Supporting Creditor

Official Receiver

Official Receiver

Procedural Posture

Companies (winding Up) Proceedings / Costs Application to Vary Costs Order; Reasons for Decision on Costs (chambers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Costs Order should be varied
  2. 2 Whether the PLs are entitled to recover their costs from the company's assets
  3. 3 Whether the PLs acted unreasonably or partisan in opposing the Petition

Ratio Decidendi

The summons to vary the Costs Order was dismissed because the PLs chose to oppose the Petition, their filings were to advance their own contestation rather than to assist the court, and their partisan and unreasonable conduct justified depriving them of the ability to recover the costs they incurred from the company's assets; the original Costs Order stands, with costs of the summons to be paid by the PLs to the Petitioner, taxed if not agreed, with certificate for two counsel.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed; application to vary Costs Order refused

Orders

  • Summons dated 20 May 2022 seeking variation of the Costs Order dismissed
  • The PLs are ordered to pay the costs of the summons to the Petitioner, to be taxed if not agreed, with certificate for two counsel