YUEN TSZ CHUN FRANK and CHAN HOI YAN, the Joint and Several Liquidators of RZ3262019 LTD (in Liquidation) v. ZHOU YING INVESTMENTS GROUP LTD AND OTHERS

YUEN TSZ CHUN FRANK and CHAN HOI YAN, the Joint and Several Liquidators of RZ3262019 LTD (in Liquidation) v. ZHOU YING INVESTMENTS GROUP LTD AND OTHERS

Leave to appeal was refused. The judge concluded that (1) the jurisdictional question under s266 is intrinsically linked to the form of the remedy sought so there was no reasonable prospect of success on Ground 1; (2) Ground 2 (standards of proof / issue estoppel) raised arguable points but were premature at the striking out stage and it was not plain and obvious that the foreign court had decided the issues so no estoppel arose; and (3) Ground 3 failed because the judge had made an evaluative assessment of multiple factors and was not plainly wrong to find no collateral attack or Henderson abuse.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 6364
Parties
Plaintiffs (joint and Several Liquidators of RZ3262019 Limited (in Liquidation)): Yuen Tsz Chun Frank and Chan Hoi Yan; 1st Defendant: 1st Defendant; 2nd Defendant: 2nd Defendant
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 December 2025
Case Number
HCMP1589/2024
Procedural Posture
Winding Up / Preference Recovery (s266 Cap.32) / Summons for Leave to Appeal Against Striking Out Decision (striking Out Stage; Decision Refusing Leave)
Outcome
1st Defendant's Summons dismissed; leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Preferences and Restoration Under S266 Cap.32, Issue Estoppel and Standards of Proof, Abuse of Process (henderson V Henderson), Leave to Appeal, Jurisdictional Scope of Remedial Orders
Source Language
EN
Companies Law Insolvency Civil Procedure Private International Law Preferences and Restoration Under S266 Cap.32 Issue Estoppel and Standards of Proof Abuse of Process (henderson V Henderson) Leave to Appeal +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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yuen Tsz Chun Frank and Chan Hoi Yan

Plaintiffs (joint and Several Liquidators of RZ3262019 Limited (in Liquidation))

1st Defendant

1st Defendant

2nd Defendant

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Winding Up / Preference Recovery (s266 Cap.32) / Summons for Leave to Appeal Against Striking Out Decision (striking Out Stage; Decision Refusing Leave)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s266 empowers the court in exceptional circumstances to order restoration to persons other than the payer
  2. 2 Whether there was evidential basis for exceptional circumstances on the pleaded facts
  3. 3 Whether the application of Alexander Brothers v Alstom (standards of proof) gives rise to issue estoppel preventing relitigation

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused. The judge concluded that (1) the jurisdictional question under s266 is intrinsically linked to the form of the remedy sought so there was no reasonable prospect of success on Ground 1; (2) Ground 2 (standards of proof / issue estoppel) raised arguable points but were premature at the striking out stage and it was not plain and obvious that the foreign court had decided the issues so no estoppel arose; and (3) Ground 3 failed because the judge had made an evaluative assessment of multiple factors and was not plainly wrong to find no collateral attack or Henderson abuse.

Court Disposition

1st Defendant's Summons dismissed; leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • 1st Defendant to pay the Plaintiffs' costs of the 1st Defendant's Summons forthwith, with certificate for two counsel, summarily assessed at HK$380,000