RE VIEW DEVELOPMENT LTD

Parties

Procedural Posture

Winding Up Petition Under Companies Ordinance; Interlocutory Applications for Strike Out and Security for Costs / Chambers Hearing and Decision on Strike Out and Security for Costs Applications

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether the winding-up relief in a petition under ss177(1)(f) and 168A should be struck out as having no real prospect of success
2. 2 Whether the petitioner is ordinarily resident within the jurisdiction
3. 3 Whether security for costs should be ordered against the petitioner and if so in what amount

Ratio Decidendi

The strike out application was dismissed because the audited accounts and evidence showed balance-sheet insolvency and therefore it was not plain and obvious that there was no real prospect of a winding-up order; the petitioner was held to be ordinarily resident out of the jurisdiction (central management and control in Liberia) and had not demonstrated substantial readily available assets in Hong Kong, so the court exercised its discretion to order security for costs and fixed the amount at HK$550,000 with a 28-day period to pay or provide a bank guarantee, otherwise proceedings stayed.

Court Disposition

Strike out application dismissed; security for costs ordered against petitioner

Orders

• Petitioner to pay into court HK$550000 or provide a bank guarantee for that sum within 28 days as security for costs of the 2nd and 3rd respondents
• If security is not provided within 28 days, all further proceedings in the petition are stayed until security is provided