CHEN YUNG NGAI KENNETH AND ANOTHER v. HUGILL & IP (A Firm) AND ANOTHER
The trustees demonstrated reasonable suspicion that the requested documents relate to the bankrupt and are necessary for the trustees to perform their functions; the 971 Judgment expressly found the corporate defendants were nominees of the bankrupt such that the trustees step into their shoes and may require production; therefore LPP cannot be successfully asserted against the trustees in respect of those nominees and the respondents must produce specified documents and provide specified affidavits within 28 days; costs limited to reasonable photocopying to be paid from the estate and no personal costs order against the trustees.
- Citation
- [2023] HKCFI 151
- Parties
- Applicant (trustee in Bankruptcy): Chen Yung Ngai Kenneth; Applicant (trustee in Bankruptcy): Chen Mei Mei; 1st Respondent: Hugill & Ip (A Firm); 2nd Respondent: Oldham, Li & Nie (A Firm)
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 13 January 2023
- Case Number
- HCB3819/2011
- Procedural Posture
- Bankruptcy (trustee's Section 29 Application) / Decision on Summons (judgment)
- Outcome
- Order granted in part for production and affidavits; trustees to bear reasonable photocopying costs from the estate; application for personal costs by OLN refused; liberty to apply for costs under rule 87C
- Legal Topics
- Section 29 Bankruptcy Ordinance Disclosure, Legal Professional Privilege (advice and Litigation), Production of Documents and Redaction, Nominee Findings and Trustees Stepping Into Shoes, Costs Allocation for Production by Former Solicitors
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Chen Yung Ngai Kenneth
Applicant (trustee in Bankruptcy)
Chen Mei Mei
Applicant (trustee in Bankruptcy)
Hugill & Ip (A Firm)
1st Respondent
Oldham, Li & Nie (A Firm)
2nd Respondent
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy (trustee's Section 29 Application) / Decision on Summons (judgment)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the documents sought relate to the bankrupt, his dealings or property and are reasonably required by the trustees under s.29 BO
- 2 Whether legal professional privilege (LPP) applies to the documents and if it can be asserted against the trustees given the 971 Judgment
- 3 Whether respondents are able and must produce the documents and provide affidavits
Ratio Decidendi
The trustees demonstrated reasonable suspicion that the requested documents relate to the bankrupt and are necessary for the trustees to perform their functions; the 971 Judgment expressly found the corporate defendants were nominees of the bankrupt such that the trustees step into their shoes and may require production; therefore LPP cannot be successfully asserted against the trustees in respect of those nominees and the respondents must produce specified documents and provide specified affidavits within 28 days; costs limited to reasonable photocopying to be paid from the estate and no personal costs order against the trustees.
Court Disposition
Order granted in part for production and affidavits; trustees to bear reasonable photocopying costs from the estate; application for personal costs by OLN refused; liberty to apply for costs under rule 87C
Orders
- Respondents to disclose within 28 days copies of all details of payments made to each Respondent for the legal proceedings in HCA 971/2012
- Respondents to disclose all bills, receipts, correspondence, counsel fee notes, invoices, cheques, bank drafts, cashier orders, online transfer records and other payment records and supporting wiring instructions and communications in respect of such payments relating to the 971 Action
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment