RE S. MEGGA TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD.

RE S. MEGGA TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD.

The judge exercised discretion to permit the Receivers to file evidence in reply and adjourned the S. Megga scheme to allow that evidence to be filed; the judge further adjourned the Wireless Internetworks (Win) scheme because the hive down interdependency created a real risk that successful challenge in S. Megga's...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RE S. MEGGA TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD.
Parties
Applicant/company: Wireless Internetworks Limited (Receivers and Managers appointed); Affected Company: S. Megga Telecommunications Limited (Receivers and Managers appointed); Opposing Creditor: Chan Shu Bun
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
1 March 2002
Case Number
HCMP5550/2001
Procedural Posture
Scheme Sanction Application Under Companies Ordinance (cap.32) / Hearing; Adjourned
Outcome
Both the S. Megga scheme and the Wireless Internetworks (Win) scheme hearings were adjourned.
Legal Topics
Scheme of Arrangement, Receivers and Managers, Preferential Creditors (s.79), Hive Down, Adjournment
Source Language
en
Company Law Insolvency Civil Procedure Scheme of Arrangement Receivers and Managers Preferential Creditors (s.79) Hive Down Adjournment

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wireless Internetworks Limited (Receivers and Managers appointed)

Applicant/company

S. Megga Telecommunications Limited (Receivers and Managers appointed)

Affected Company

Chan Shu Bun

Opposing Creditor

Procedural Posture

Scheme Sanction Application Under Companies Ordinance (cap.32) / Hearing; Adjourned

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Receivers are entitled to put in affidavit evidence in reply about employees' s.79 preferences
  2. 2 Whether the S. Megga scheme hearing should be adjourned to permit that evidence
  3. 3 Whether the Win (Wireless Internetworks) scheme can be heard separately given interrelated hive down transactions that may be challenged in a winding up

Ratio Decidendi

The judge exercised discretion to permit the Receivers to file evidence in reply and adjourned the S. Megga scheme to allow that evidence to be filed; the judge further adjourned the Wireless Internetworks (Win) scheme because the hive down interdependency created a real risk that successful challenge in S. Megga's liquidation could affect the restructuring, making it inappropriate to hear Win separately.

Court Disposition

Both the S. Megga scheme and the Wireless Internetworks (Win) scheme hearings were adjourned.

Orders

  • Receivers to file and serve an affidavit by 5 March 2002
  • Adjourn the hearing of the S. Megga scheme