JAMES WARDELL AND JACKSON IP, Joint and Several Liquidators of KIN MING TOY MANUFACTORY LTD (In Liquidation) v. CHENG SHING KI AND ANOTHER
The Court followed the binding authority of the Court of Appeal in Kam Toys that an unsuccessful application initiated by a liquidator attracts personal liability for costs, and ordered the petitioning liquidators to pay the respondents' costs personally with a certificate for counsel.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] HKCFI 2285
- Parties
- Petitioner: James Wardell and Jackson Ip; 1st Respondent: Cheng Shing Ki; 2nd Respondent: Bangkok Bank Public Company Limited
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 10 October 2018
- Case Number
- HCCW402/2015
- Procedural Posture
- Companies Winding Up Proceedings / Decision on Costs (application Under S182 Heard and Dismissed)
- Outcome
- Application dismissed; costs awarded against the petitioning liquidators personally
- Legal Topics
- Liquidator Liability for Costs, Section 182 Companies (winding Up and Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (cap 32), Precedent Effect of Court of Appeal Decision
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
James Wardell and Jackson Ip
Petitioner
Cheng Shing Ki
1st Respondent
Bangkok Bank Public Company Limited
2nd Respondent
Procedural Posture
Companies Winding Up Proceedings / Decision on Costs (application Under S182 Heard and Dismissed)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether payments sought to be declared void under s182 should succeed
- 2 Whether costs of the unsuccessful application should be paid from the company assets or personally by the liquidators
- 3 Whether the Court should follow the Court of Appeal decision in Kam Toys
Ratio Decidendi
The Court followed the binding authority of the Court of Appeal in Kam Toys that an unsuccessful application initiated by a liquidator attracts personal liability for costs, and ordered the petitioning liquidators to pay the respondents' costs personally with a certificate for counsel.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed; costs awarded against the petitioning liquidators personally
Orders
- The respondents' costs of the summons are to be paid personally by the Petitioner with a certificate for counsel.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
HCCW 402/2015 [2018] HKCFI 2285 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE COMPANIES WINDINGUP PROCEEDINGS NO 402 OF 2015 ________________ IN THE MATTER of Kin Ming Toy Manufactory Limited (Number: 0023100) and IN THE MATTER of the Companies (Winding Up and Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap 32) ________________ BETWEEN JAMES WARDELL AND JACKSON IP, Petitioner Joint and Several Liquidators of KIN MING TOY MANUFACTORY LIMITED (In Liquidation) AND CHENG SHING KI 1st Respondent BANGKOK BANK PUBLIC COMPANY LIMITED 2nd Respondent ________________ Before: Hon Harris J in Chambers Date of Hearing: 22 August 2018 Date of Decision on Costs: 10 October 2018 ____________________________ D E C I S I O N O N C O S T S ____________________________ On 22 August 2018 I heard an application by the liquidators of the company in liquidation under section 182 of the Companies (Winding Up and Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance, Cap 32, for payments described in the judgment that I gave that day to be declared void. I dismissed the application. I did not determine costs at that time because the 2nd Respondent, Bangkok Bank Public Company Limited, argued that rather than order that the successful Respondents’ costs should be paid out of the assets of the company the order should provide that the costs are paid by the Liquidators. Mr Jonathan Wong who appeared for the 2nd Respondent referred to a decision of the Court of Appeal in Kam Toys & Novelty Manufacturing Limited (unreported, CACV 67/2017, 13 November 2017) of which he did not have a copy in court. It was provided to me subsequently. In Kam Toys Yuen JA explains in [43]–[45] of her judgment that if a liquidator initiates an application, which proves to be unsuccessful, the correct order is that the liquidator should be liable for costs personally. I can see no reason why on the facts of this case I should make any other order than that made in Kam Toys, a decision which binds me. I, therefore, order that the Respondents’ costs of the summons are to be paid personally by the Petitioner with a certificate for counsel. (Jonathan Harris) Judge of the Court of First Instance High Court Ms Janine Cheung, instructed by ONC Lawyers, for the applicant Mr David Chen, instructed by Fairbairn Catley Low & Kong, for the 1st respondent Mr Jonathan Wong, instructed by Deacons, for the 2nd respondent The attendance of the Official Receiver was excused