RE GOLDLORY RESTAURANT LTD

RE GOLDLORY RESTAURANT LTD

The court held that under s196(2) and r146(2) it has an unfettered discretion to fix liquidator remuneration in summary cases; r146(2) does not make the Official Receiver's percentage scale the default. As a matter of practice the court will adopt the time cost basis as the standard for remuneration of liquidators...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RE GOLDLORY RESTAURANT LTD
Parties
Interested Party / Official Receiver: Official Receiver; Liquidators' Representative: Alvarez & Marsal Asia Ltd; Liquidators' Representative: Baker Tilly Hong Kong Business Recovery Limited; Liquidators' Representative: Kenny Tam & Co.; Liquidators' Representative: Gallant Y.T. Ho & Co.
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 July 2006
Case Number
HCCW575/2001
Procedural Posture
Company Winding Up (summary Procedure) / Determination of Legal Issue Referred by Master (chambers Decision)
Outcome
Issue determined in favour of adopting time cost basis for remuneration of liquidators in summary winding-ups; court discretion under s196(2) allows departing from percentage as default
Legal Topics
Liquidator Remuneration, Summary Winding Up Procedure, Statutory Interpretation, Panel T Tender Scheme
Source Language
en
Company Law Insolvency Law Civil Procedure Liquidator Remuneration Summary Winding Up Procedure Statutory Interpretation Panel T Tender Scheme

Source-derived case record

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Official Receiver

Interested Party / Official Receiver

Alvarez & Marsal Asia Ltd

Liquidators' Representative

Baker Tilly Hong Kong Business Recovery Limited

Liquidators' Representative

Kenny Tam & Co.

Liquidators' Representative

Gallant Y.T. Ho & Co.

Liquidators' Representative

Procedural Posture

Company Winding Up (summary Procedure) / Determination of Legal Issue Referred by Master (chambers Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether remuneration of liquidators appointed under s227F should be fixed on a percentage basis or a time cost basis and whether percentage is the default under s196(2) and r146(2)

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that under s196(2) and r146(2) it has an unfettered discretion to fix liquidator remuneration in summary cases; r146(2) does not make the Official Receiver's percentage scale the default. As a matter of practice the court will adopt the time cost basis as the standard for remuneration of liquidators in summary winding-ups under s227F and such basis should be provided for when the summary procedure order is made.

Court Disposition

Issue determined in favour of adopting time cost basis for remuneration of liquidators in summary winding-ups; court discretion under s196(2) allows departing from percentage as default

Orders

  • Time cost basis to be adopted as the standard basis of remuneration in summary procedure orders under s227F and it is appropriate to provide for this when the summary procedure order is made
  • Costs of earlier hearing on 23 March 2006 reserved; Official Receiver and participants to inform the court by letter within 7 days what order as to costs they seek