RE LEUNG YAT TUNG

RE LEUNG YAT TUNG

The court refused to grant the interim order because the debtor and the intended nominees failed to provide full and frank disclosure, including a material misrepresentation of liabilities by omitting security values and inadequate verification by nominees; the proposal was therefore not shown to be serious and viable and the exercise of discretion to impose a moratorium was refused; the bankruptcy order was made as the petition was uncontested.

Citation
RE LEUNG YAT TUNG
Parties
Petitioner: Healthy Wharf Limited; Debtor/respondent: Leung Yat Tung; Nominees: Intended Nominees; Creditors: Creditors
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
1 March 2001
Case Number
HCBI1/2001
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy / Interim Order Application Under Ss20/20 A/20 C and Hearing of Bankruptcy Petition
Outcome
Debtor's application for interim order dismissed; bankruptcy order made against the debtor.
Legal Topics
Interim Moratorium, Individual Voluntary Arrangement (iva), Full and Frank Disclosure, Nominee Duties, Discretionary Trust, Transfers at Undervalue, Guarantees and Securities, Scheme of Arrangement
Source Language
EN
Bankruptcy Insolvency Trusts Civil Procedure Interim Moratorium Individual Voluntary Arrangement (iva) Full and Frank Disclosure Nominee Duties +4 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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 17
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Healthy Wharf Limited

Petitioner

Leung Yat Tung

Debtor/respondent

Intended Nominees

Nominees

Creditors

Creditors

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy / Interim Order Application Under Ss20/20 A/20 C and Hearing of Bankruptcy Petition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interim order under s20/20A/20C should be made given the debtor's disclosure
  2. 2 Whether the debtor's proposal for a voluntary arrangement was serious and viable
  3. 3 Whether the intended nominees breached duties by failing to disclose securities and verifying debtor's position

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to grant the interim order because the debtor and the intended nominees failed to provide full and frank disclosure, including a material misrepresentation of liabilities by omitting security values and inadequate verification by nominees; the proposal was therefore not shown to be serious and viable and the exercise of discretion to impose a moratorium was refused; the bankruptcy order was made as the petition was uncontested.

Court Disposition

Debtor's application for interim order dismissed; bankruptcy order made against the debtor.

Orders

  • Debtor's application for an interim order dismissed
  • Bankruptcy order to be made against Mr Leung Yat Tung