KWAN KAM WAH v. BANK OF CHINA (HONG KONG) LTD

KWAN KAM WAH v. BANK OF CHINA (HONG KONG) LTD

The bank established it had taken all reasonable steps to effect personal service and to bring the statutory demand to the applicant's attention (including advertisement on 5 June 2012); the challenge to the second judgment and allegations of mala fides were unsubstantiated and the applicant showed no prejudice from any overstatement of the debt; therefore the application to set aside the statutory demand and the application to extend time were dismissed.

Citation
KWAN KAM WAH v. BANK OF CHINA (HONG KONG) LTD
Parties
Applicant (judgment Debtor): Kwan Kam Wah; Respondent (judgment Creditor): Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 November 2013
Case Number
HCSD8/2013
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Decision on Application (in Chambers)
Outcome
Application dismissed; respondent authorized to present bankruptcy petition forthwith
Legal Topics
Statutory Demand, Service by Advertisement, Setting Aside Statutory Demand, Bankruptcy Petition, Judgment Debt, Extension of Time Under Court Rules
Source Language
EN
Bankruptcy Law Civil Procedure Debt Recovery Statutory Demand Service by Advertisement Setting Aside Statutory Demand Bankruptcy Petition Judgment Debt +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kwan Kam Wah

Applicant (judgment Debtor)

Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited

Respondent (judgment Creditor)

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Decision on Application (in Chambers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statutory demand was validly brought to the debtor's attention and properly served by advertisement under Rule 46
  2. 2 Whether the second judgment was legally defective so as to justify setting aside the statutory demand
  3. 3 Whether the creditor acted mala fide or unfairly by delay in enforcing judgments

Ratio Decidendi

The bank established it had taken all reasonable steps to effect personal service and to bring the statutory demand to the applicant's attention (including advertisement on 5 June 2012); the challenge to the second judgment and allegations of mala fides were unsubstantiated and the applicant showed no prejudice from any overstatement of the debt; therefore the application to set aside the statutory demand and the application to extend time were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; respondent authorized to present bankruptcy petition forthwith

Orders

  • The application dated 5 February 2013 to set aside the Statutory Demand is dismissed.
  • Pursuant to Rule 48(7) the Respondent is authorized to present a bankruptcy petition against the Applicant forthwith.