ALAN CHUNG WAH TANG AND ANOTHER v. LEE SIU FONG AND ANOTHER

ALAN CHUNG WAH TANG AND ANOTHER v. LEE SIU FONG AND ANOTHER

The defendants were guilty of contempt for delayed and incomplete compliance with the s.29 order but had purged the contempt before sentencing; the delay could be credibly attributed to reliance on legal advice and many alleged missing documents were not required under the correct construction of paragraph 2; there was no identified irremediable prejudice warranting imprisonment; accordingly a punitive fine of HK$200,000 each was appropriate and costs were to be awarded on a party-and-party basis but not indemnity and not the trustees’ own administrative costs.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 366
Parties
Plaintiffs (joint and Several Trustees in Bankruptcy of the Property of the Bankrupt): Alan Chung Wah Tang and Hou Chung Man; 1st Defendant: Lee Siu Fong; 2nd Defendant: Leelalertsuphakun Wanee
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 February 2023
Case Number
HCMP1106/2021
Procedural Posture
Committal for Contempt (breach of S.29 Order) / Sentencing and Costs (post‑conviction Reasons for Judgment)
Outcome
Each defendant found guilty of contempt and fined HK$200,000; defendants ordered to pay the Trustees’ costs of and occasioned by the originating summons on a party-and-party basis; trustees’ application for indemnity or recovery of their own administrative costs denied.
Legal Topics
Production of Documents, S.29 Bankruptcy Order, Committal and Sentencing, Costs Taxation, Purging Contempt
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Bankruptcy Production of Documents S.29 Bankruptcy Order Committal and Sentencing Costs Taxation Purging Contempt

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan Chung Wah Tang and Hou Chung Man

Plaintiffs (joint and Several Trustees in Bankruptcy of the Property of the Bankrupt)

Lee Siu Fong

1st Defendant

Leelalertsuphakun Wanee

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Committal for Contempt (breach of S.29 Order) / Sentencing and Costs (post‑conviction Reasons for Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants were in contempt for breaching the s.29 order (paragraphs 2 and 4)
  2. 2 Proper construction of paragraph 2 of the s.29 order
  3. 3 Whether the contempt was contumacious/intentional or excused by legal advice

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants were guilty of contempt for delayed and incomplete compliance with the s.29 order but had purged the contempt before sentencing; the delay could be credibly attributed to reliance on legal advice and many alleged missing documents were not required under the correct construction of paragraph 2; there was no identified irremediable prejudice warranting imprisonment; accordingly a punitive fine of HK$200,000 each was appropriate and costs were to be awarded on a party-and-party basis but not indemnity and not the trustees’ own administrative costs.

Court Disposition

Each defendant found guilty of contempt and fined HK$200,000; defendants ordered to pay the Trustees’ costs of and occasioned by the originating summons on a party-and-party basis; trustees’ application for indemnity or recovery of their own administrative costs denied.

Orders

  • Each defendant to pay a fine of HK$200,000 to be paid within 14 days
  • Defendants to pay the Trustees’ costs of and occasioned by the originating summons on a party-and-party basis