YU CHI MING v. CHIU YEE WAH KATHERINE AND ANOTHER

YU CHI MING v. CHIU YEE WAH KATHERINE AND ANOTHER

The petition was dismissed because the petitioner failed to prove the factual basis of his complaints and many allegations were unmeritorious; the court found that the respondent had diverted company business and funds to entities under the petitioner’s control and had made out her counterclaims, and therefore...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
YU CHI MING v. CHIU YEE WAH KATHERINE AND ANOTHER
Parties
Petitioner: YU CHI MING; 1st Respondent: CHIU YEE WAH KATHERINE; 2nd Respondent: GLORY PLAN INDUSTRIAL LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 December 2004
Case Number
HCCW724/2002
Procedural Posture
Companies (winding‑up) No. 724 of 2002; Action No. 2820 of 2002 (heard Together) / Trial Judgment / Reasons for Judgment Handed Down 16 December 2004
Outcome
Petition dismissed; purchase order made requiring Yu Chi Ming to buy Katherine Chiu's 50,000 shares; order nisi for indemnity costs against Yu Chi Ming.
Legal Topics
Share Buy‑out, Winding Up Petition, Derivative Action, Diversion of Corporate Opportunity, Costs on Indemnity Basis, Statutory Demand
Source Language
en
Company Law Insolvency Equity Civil Procedure Fiduciary Duties Share Buy‑out Winding Up Petition Derivative Action +3 more

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

YU CHI MING

Petitioner

CHIU YEE WAH KATHERINE

1st Respondent

GLORY PLAN INDUSTRIAL LIMITED

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Companies (winding‑up) No. 724 of 2002; Action No. 2820 of 2002 (heard Together) / Trial Judgment / Reasons for Judgment Handed Down 16 December 2004

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the petitioner was entitled to a buy‑out order or winding up relief under s177(1)(f) of the Companies Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the petitioner proved the alleged misapplications of company funds and concealment of documents
  3. 3 Whether the respondent/director diverted company business and funds to the subsidiary and third parties in breach of fiduciary duties

Ratio Decidendi

The petition was dismissed because the petitioner failed to prove the factual basis of his complaints and many allegations were unmeritorious; the court found that the respondent had diverted company business and funds to entities under the petitioner’s control and had made out her counterclaims, and therefore ordered the petitioner to purchase the respondent’s 50,000 shares at HK$2,032,118 and made an order nisi for indemnity costs against the petitioner.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed; purchase order made requiring Yu Chi Ming to buy Katherine Chiu's 50,000 shares; order nisi for indemnity costs against Yu Chi Ming.

Orders

  • Petition dismissed.
  • The 50,000 shares held by Katherine Chiu of and in Glory Plan Industrial Limited be purchased by Yu Chi Ming at the price of $2,032,118.