RE S. MEGGA TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD.

RE S. MEGGA TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD.

The Receivers are entitled to put in the indicated affidavit in reply concerning employees' preferential entitlements under section 79; because those issues and the potential challenge to the hive down are material to the restructuring, both the S. Megga and the Wireless Internetworks (Win) scheme hearings must be...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RE S. MEGGA TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD.
Parties
Applicant Company (scheme Proponent): Wireless Internetworks Limited; Subject Company (scheme Proponent/subsidiary): S. Megga Telecommunications Limited; Opposing Creditor: Chan Shu Bun (Opposing creditor)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
1 March 2002
Case Number
HCMP5551/2001
Procedural Posture
Application for Sanction of Schemes Under Companies Ordinance (cap.32) / Hearing; Adjourned for Further Evidence and Directions
Outcome
Hearing adjourned; Receivers permitted to file evidence in reply; both schemes' hearings adjourned
Legal Topics
Scheme of Arrangement, Preferential Claims (employees), Receivers and Managers, Hive Down, Adjournment and Evidence in Reply
Source Language
en
Company Law Insolvency Civil Procedure Scheme of Arrangement Preferential Claims (employees) Receivers and Managers Hive Down Adjournment and Evidence in Reply

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

Applicant Company (scheme Proponent)

S. Megga Telecommunications Limited

Subject Company (scheme Proponent/subsidiary)

Chan Shu Bun (Opposing creditor)

Opposing Creditor

Procedural Posture

Application for Sanction of Schemes Under Companies Ordinance (cap.32) / Hearing; Adjourned for Further Evidence and Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Receivers are entitled to put in evidence in reply regarding employees' preferential claims under s.79 of the Companies Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the hearing of the S. Megga scheme should proceed today in light of objections by employees
  3. 3 Whether the Win (Wireless Internetworks) scheme can be heard independently given the risk that a hive down may be challenged if S. Megga is wound up

Ratio Decidendi

The Receivers are entitled to put in the indicated affidavit in reply concerning employees' preferential entitlements under section 79; because those issues and the potential challenge to the hive down are material to the restructuring, both the S. Megga and the Wireless Internetworks (Win) scheme hearings must be adjourned to enable that evidence to be filed and considered, and to prevent potential prejudice if the hive down is subsequently set aside.

Court Disposition

Hearing adjourned; Receivers permitted to file evidence in reply; both schemes' hearings adjourned

Orders

  • Adjourn the hearing of HCMP 5551/2001 (S. Megga) to permit the Receivers to file evidence in reply
  • Adjourn the hearing of HCMP 5550/2001 (Wireless Internetworks/Win) given the interdependence with the S. Megga matters