LAM CHOK LAI AND ANOTHER v. THE OFFICIAL RECEIVER AND TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY OF LAM CHOK WAI, A BANKRUPT
The plaintiffs discharged their burden by adducing up‑to‑date independent valuations and evidence of failed marketing; the court therefore exercised jurisdiction under the Partition Ordinance to vary directions to facilitate sale, refused an extended adjournment for the 2nd Defendant absent contemporaneous evidence, permitted sale pursuant to the Tang Offer subject to limited procedural conditions, and ordered costs against the 2nd Defendant.
- Citation
- [2021] HKCFI 260
- Parties
- 1st Plaintiff: LAM CHOK LAI; 2nd Plaintiff: LAM CHOK LAI, The Executor of the Estate of LAM SHUM SHUN MUI, Deceased; 1st Defendant: The Official Receiver and Trustee in Bankruptcy of LAM CHOK WAI, a Bankrupt; 2nd Defendant: GENERAL FORTUNE INTERNATIONAL INC.
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 3 February 2021
- Case Number
- HCMP3042/2016
- Procedural Posture
- Application to Vary Order for Sale Under the Partition Ordinance / Decision on Summons in Chambers (reasons for Decision)
- Outcome
- Summons granted with directions to vary the sale arrangements under the 2018/2019 orders; sale to proceed subject to specified conditions, limited liberty for the 2nd Defendant to adduce expert evidence, and costs orders in favour of the plaintiffs and Official Receiver out of sale proceeds.
- Legal Topics
- Partition Ordinance, Order for Sale, Variation of Reserve Price, Valuation Evidence, Costs
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
LAM CHOK LAI
1st Plaintiff
LAM CHOK LAI, The Executor of the Estate of LAM SHUM SHUN MUI, Deceased
2nd Plaintiff
The Official Receiver and Trustee in Bankruptcy of LAM CHOK WAI, a Bankrupt
1st Defendant
GENERAL FORTUNE INTERNATIONAL INC.
2nd Defendant
Procedural Posture
Application to Vary Order for Sale Under the Partition Ordinance / Decision on Summons in Chambers (reasons for Decision)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should vary the reserve price and give further directions to enable a sale under section 6 of the Partition Ordinance
- 2 Whether the 2nd Defendant should be allowed an adjournment to file expert valuation evidence
- 3 Whether the Tang Offer should be accepted and sale allowed to proceed subject to conditions
Ratio Decidendi
The plaintiffs discharged their burden by adducing up‑to‑date independent valuations and evidence of failed marketing; the court therefore exercised jurisdiction under the Partition Ordinance to vary directions to facilitate sale, refused an extended adjournment for the 2nd Defendant absent contemporaneous evidence, permitted sale pursuant to the Tang Offer subject to limited procedural conditions, and ordered costs against the 2nd Defendant.
Court Disposition
Summons granted with directions to vary the sale arrangements under the 2018/2019 orders; sale to proceed subject to specified conditions, limited liberty for the 2nd Defendant to adduce expert evidence, and costs orders in favour of the plaintiffs and Official Receiver out of sale proceeds.
Orders
- Order varied in terms of the Summons with specified revisions
- Time for completion of sale pursuant to the Tang Offer extended for one week
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment