CHOW HON LEUNG VINCENT v. BOKEN LTD. and Others
The court directed that respondents file evidence on the whole petition while noting their concession to a winding-up order, granted leave to restore the matter for further directions and argument rather than making a final order, and warned that the petitioner would likely bear costs from the date of concession if...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- CHOW HON LEUNG VINCENT v. BOKEN LTD. and Others
- Parties
- Petitioner: CHOW HON LEUNG VINCENT; 1st Respondent: BOKEN LIMITED; 2nd Respondent: BOGA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED; 3rd Respondent: KAO CHEUNG CHONG, MICHAEL
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 10 June 1997
- Case Number
- HCCW212/1997
- Procedural Posture
- Companies (winding Up) / Hearing (directions); Interim Directions Given, Leave to Restore for Further Directions
- Outcome
- Interim directions given; respondents ordered to file evidence; matter left open for further directions and argument; no final winding-up order made today; leave to restore granted.
- Legal Topics
- Winding Up, Just and Equitable Grounds, Section 168 a, Share Purchase Remedy, Procedural Directions, Costs
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
CHOW HON LEUNG VINCENT
Petitioner
BOKEN LIMITED
1st Respondent
BOGA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
2nd Respondent
KAO CHEUNG CHONG, MICHAEL
3rd Respondent
Procedural Posture
Companies (winding Up) / Hearing (directions); Interim Directions Given, Leave to Restore for Further Directions
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether winding-up should be ordered on just and equitable grounds
- 2 Whether petitioner is entitled to pursue relief under s.168A rather than the company prosecuting wrongdoers
- 3 Whether respondents should be ordered to file evidence and on what basis
Ratio Decidendi
The court directed that respondents file evidence on the whole petition while noting their concession to a winding-up order, granted leave to restore the matter for further directions and argument rather than making a final order, and warned that the petitioner would likely bear costs from the date of concession if only a winding-up order is obtained; the court observed that the petitioner may have an advantage under s.168A.
Court Disposition
Interim directions given; respondents ordered to file evidence; matter left open for further directions and argument; no final winding-up order made today; leave to restore granted.
Orders
- Respondents to file evidence on the whole petition
- Evidence to be filed on the basis that respondents have conceded they are prepared to allow a winding-up order to be made
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
bjbj& 1997, CWU No. 212 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG HIGH COURT COMPANIES (WINDING-UP) NO. 212 OF 1997 ____________ IN THE MATTER of Boken Limited and IN THE MATTER of ss. 168A and 177(1)(f) of the Companies Ordinance, Cap. 32, the Laws of Hong Kong. ____________ BETWEEN CHOW HON LEUNG VINCENT Petitioner and BOKEN LIMITED 1st Respondent BOGA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED 2nd Respondent KAO CHEUNG CHONG, MICHAEL 3rd Respondent ____________ Coram: The Hon. Mr. Justice Rogers in Court Date of Hearing: 10th June 1997 Date of Delivery of Decision: 10th June 1997 ______________ D E C I S I O N ______________ This is an unusual case. It is a petition for a winding-up under the just and equitable grounds with an alternative prayer for relief that the Respondents do buy the shares of the Petitioner. The strange part of this case is that the Respondents appear today by counsel and are prepared to consent to the Petitioner s primary prayer for relief, namely the winding-up. In those circumstances, I am distinctly unhappy about the further conduct of these proceedings but I do not feel that the matter has been fully argued today and am not prepared to make a final order on this although I will give leave for the matter to be brought back to this Court for further directions and further application when the parties have had a chance to research the matter fully. After such research as I have been able to do this morning and having reminded myself of some of the authorities, it seems to me clear that the Petitioner may have an advantage in bringing proceedings under Section 168A rather than leaving it to the company to take proceedings against potential wrongdoers. In those circumstances, I propose to give directions that the Respondents do file evidence. It will be evidence on the whole petition but it will be on the basis of having today conceded that they are prepared to allow a winding-up order to be made. If the Petitioner does not succeed in obtaining any more than a winding-up order on the hearing of the Petition, it is very likely that the Petitioner will have to bear all the costs of the petition from today onwards. I will hear the parties as to what orders as to the filing of evidence they need, bearing in mind that they may also wish to have the matter restored for further directions and argument on the procedural point. (Anthony G. Rogers) Judge of the High Court Mr. Horace Wong inst d by M/s Allen Chan & Co. for Petitioner Mr. Winston Poon Q.C. inst d by M/s. Baker & Mckenzie for Respondent Mr. M.K. Tam for Official Receiver - PAGE - W[SO @& @& @& @Epson LQ-100 ESC/P 2 LPT1: ESCP2MS Epson LQ-100 ESC/P 2 Epson LQ-100 ESC/P 2 MSUD Epson LQ-100 ESC/P 2 Epson LQ-100 ESC/P 2 MSUD Epson LQ-100 ESC/P 2 " & 6" 199, No. A Judiciary Rogers Microsoft Word 8.0 199, No. A Title _PID_GUID Microsoft Word MSWordDoc Word.Document.8