GLORY LINK INVESTMENTS LTD v. YOUNG PUI YORK

GLORY LINK INVESTMENTS LTD v. YOUNG PUI YORK

The court found the creditor failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the ~HK$3,000,000 was disposed of with a view to avoiding satisfaction because the funds were invested in a business rather than spent or concealed and there was no evidence the investment was intended to put assets beyond reach; the debtor had sold the City Garden property and paid the bulk of his entitlement, leaving HK$116,300 in solicitors' client account which the court ordered paid to the creditor within 14 days; accordingly no imprisonment order was made.

Citation
GLORY LINK INVESTMENTS LTD v. YOUNG PUI YORK
Parties
Plaintiff (judgment Creditor): Glory Link Investments Limited; Defendant (judgment Debtor): Young Pui York
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
31 May 2016
Case Number
HCA1240/2009
Procedural Posture
High Court Action No 1240 of 2009 Enforcement/application for Imprisonment Order / Application for Imprisonment Order Under Order 49 B; Hearing and Decision
Outcome
No imprisonment order made. Payment order made: Judgment Debtor to pay HK$116,300 to Judgment Creditor within 14 days. Costs of examination and hearing awarded to Judgment Creditor, to be borne by Judgment Debtor with certificate for counsel, taxed if not agreed.
Legal Topics
Imprisonment Order, Order 49 B Rule 1 B, Ability to Satisfy Judgment, Disposal of Assets to Avoid Satisfaction, Costs
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Enforcement of Judgment Contempt of Court Property Law Imprisonment Order Order 49 B Rule 1 B Ability to Satisfy Judgment Disposal of Assets to Avoid Satisfaction +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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glory Link Investments Limited

Plaintiff (judgment Creditor)

Young Pui York

Defendant (judgment Debtor)

Procedural Posture

High Court Action No 1240 of 2009 Enforcement/application for Imprisonment Order / Application for Imprisonment Order Under Order 49 B; Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether conditions for imprisonment under Order 49B r1B(1) were satisfied
  2. 2 Whether disposal of ~HK$3,000,000 sale proceeds was with a view to avoiding satisfaction of the judgment
  3. 3 Whether 50% beneficial interest in City Garden property made debtor able to satisfy the judgment partially

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the creditor failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the ~HK$3,000,000 was disposed of with a view to avoiding satisfaction because the funds were invested in a business rather than spent or concealed and there was no evidence the investment was intended to put assets beyond reach; the debtor had sold the City Garden property and paid the bulk of his entitlement, leaving HK$116,300 in solicitors' client account which the court ordered paid to the creditor within 14 days; accordingly no imprisonment order was made.

Court Disposition

No imprisonment order made. Payment order made: Judgment Debtor to pay HK$116,300 to Judgment Creditor within 14 days. Costs of examination and hearing awarded to Judgment Creditor, to be borne by Judgment Debtor with certificate for counsel, taxed if not agreed.

Orders

  • Pursuant to Order 49B r1B(2)(a) Judgment Debtor to pay Judgment Creditor HK$116,300 within 14 days
  • Judgment Debtor to pay the Judgment Creditor's costs of the examination and the hearing for the application for an imprisonment order, with certificate for counsel, to be taxed if not agreed