ALAN HANN AND ANOTHER v. HILLORY LTD

ALAN HANN AND ANOTHER v. HILLORY LTD

Section 265(1) is silent as to assignees and does not deprive creditors of the right to assign their debts or their statutory right to preference; consequently an assignee who validly acquires employees' claims by assignment is entitled to the same statutory priority under s.265(1).

Citation
ALAN HANN AND ANOTHER v. HILLORY LTD
Parties
Applicant (liquidator): Alan Hann; Applicant (liquidator): Clement Peter James; Respondent (assignee): Hillory Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 March 1983
Case Number
HCMP177/1983
Procedural Posture
Company Winding Up / Miscellaneous Proceeding (section 255 Companies Ordinance) / Chambers Hearing Determination of Priority of Preferential Debts
Outcome
Respondent's Proof of Debt for the sums paid to ex-employees ($116,336.65) is entitled to priority under section 265(1) of the Companies Ordinance; application answered in the affirmative.
Legal Topics
Preferential Debts, Assignment of Rights, Statutory Preference, Winding Up, Subrogation
Source Language
EN
Company Law Insolvency Employment Law Statutory Interpretation Preferential Debts Assignment of Rights Statutory Preference Winding Up +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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan Hann

Applicant (liquidator)

Clement Peter James

Applicant (liquidator)

Hillory Limited

Respondent (assignee)

Procedural Posture

Company Winding Up / Miscellaneous Proceeding (section 255 Companies Ordinance) / Chambers Hearing Determination of Priority of Preferential Debts

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an assignee of ex-employees' claims can claim statutory preference under section 265(1) of the Companies Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether section 265(1) excludes assignees or prevents transfer of statutory preference by assignment
  3. 3 Whether the assignments effected by ex-employees to the Respondent pass the preferential status to the assignee

Ratio Decidendi

Section 265(1) is silent as to assignees and does not deprive creditors of the right to assign their debts or their statutory right to preference; consequently an assignee who validly acquires employees' claims by assignment is entitled to the same statutory priority under s.265(1).

Court Disposition

Respondent's Proof of Debt for the sums paid to ex-employees ($116,336.65) is entitled to priority under section 265(1) of the Companies Ordinance; application answered in the affirmative.

Orders

  • Respondent's Proof of Debt of $116,336.65 to be accorded priority under section 265(1) of the Companies Ordinance
  • Each party to bear its own costs