RE LAKE AND HOT SPRINGS COUNTRY CLUB (H.K.) LTD

RE LAKE AND HOT SPRINGS COUNTRY CLUB (H.K.) LTD

The court refused to exercise its discretion under s.270(2A) because the applicant failed to demonstrate the very strong grounds required to displace the statutory order of priorities, particularly given the existence of preferential creditors; the applicant's earlier judgment and partial execution did not justify...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RE LAKE AND HOT SPRINGS COUNTRY CLUB (H.K.) LTD
Parties
Applicant (judgment Creditor): China Engineers Limited; Respondent (company Subject to Winding Up): Lake & Hot Springs Country Club (H.K.) Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 April 1986
Case Number
HCCW30/1986
Procedural Posture
Companies (winding Up) / Chambers Summons Under S.270(2 A) for Release of Sale Proceeds Following Winding Up Order
Outcome
Summons dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Winding Up, Priority of Creditors, Execution Against Company Assets, Section 270(2)/(2 A) Companies Ordinance, Court Discretion to Set Aside Liquidator Rights
Source Language
en
Company Law Insolvency Law Civil Procedure Execution Law Winding Up Priority of Creditors Execution Against Company Assets Section 270(2)/(2 A) Companies Ordinance +1 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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

China Engineers Limited

Applicant (judgment Creditor)

Lake & Hot Springs Country Club (H.K.) Limited

Respondent (company Subject to Winding Up)

Procedural Posture

Companies (winding Up) / Chambers Summons Under S.270(2 A) for Release of Sale Proceeds Following Winding Up Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether court should exercise discretion under s.270(2A) to release sale proceeds to an execution creditor
  2. 2 Whether an execution creditor may obtain preference over preferential and other unsecured creditors where execution was not completed before winding-up
  3. 3 Standard of proof required to displace statutory priority in winding-up

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to exercise its discretion under s.270(2A) because the applicant failed to demonstrate the very strong grounds required to displace the statutory order of priorities, particularly given the existence of preferential creditors; the applicant's earlier judgment and partial execution did not justify granting preference over other creditors, and the summons was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Summons dismissed with costs.
  • No part of the proceeds of sale to be released to the applicant; proceeds to remain with the liquidator.