BOZELL ASIA (HOLDING) LTD v. CAL INTERNATIONAL LTD AND ANOTHER

BOZELL ASIA (HOLDING) LTD v. CAL INTERNATIONAL LTD AND ANOTHER

The court ordered the company wound up under Section 177(1)(d), refused to grant a stay at this stage, stayed the Section 228A miscellaneous proceedings because compulsory winding up was proceeding, directed that CAL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED pay the costs of the winding up petition, adjourned the appointment of joint liquidators, and ordered no costs in respect of the Miscellaneous Proceedings insofar as costs had been duplicated.

Citation
BOZELL ASIA (HOLDING) LTD v. CAL INTERNATIONAL LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Petitioner: BOZELL ASIA (HOLDING) LIMITED; 1st Respondent: CAL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED; 2nd Respondent: CAL/BOZELL HOLDINGS LIMITED; 1st Plaintiff: PETER DE KRASSEL; 2nd Plaintiff: CAL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED; 1st Defendant: FRANCIS ROXAS MORAN; 2nd Defendant: THOMAS YEUNG SIN KIT; 3rd Defendant: MICHAEL ANDERSON; 4th Defendant: BOZELL ASIA (HOLDING) LIMITED; 5th Defendant: CAL BOZELL HOLDINGS LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
30 October 1996
Case Number
HCCW506/1995
Procedural Posture
Winding Up Petition and Miscellaneous Proceedings Under the Companies Ordinance (cap.32) / Decision on Costs and Consequential Orders Following Hearing (winding Up Order Made)
Outcome
Winding up order made under Section 177(1)(d); stay refused at this stage; Section 228A proceedings stayed; costs allocated
Legal Topics
Winding Up, Stay of Proceedings, Appointment of Liquidators, Costs, Section 228 a Proceedings
Source Language
EN
Company Law Insolvency Law Civil Procedure Winding Up Stay of Proceedings Appointment of Liquidators Costs Section 228 a Proceedings

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BOZELL ASIA (HOLDING) LIMITED

Petitioner

CAL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

1st Respondent

CAL/BOZELL HOLDINGS LIMITED

2nd Respondent

PETER DE KRASSEL

1st Plaintiff

CAL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

2nd Plaintiff

FRANCIS ROXAS MORAN

1st Defendant

THOMAS YEUNG SIN KIT

2nd Defendant

MICHAEL ANDERSON

3rd Defendant

BOZELL ASIA (HOLDING) LIMITED

4th Defendant

CAL BOZELL HOLDINGS LIMITED

5th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Winding Up Petition and Miscellaneous Proceedings Under the Companies Ordinance (cap.32) / Decision on Costs and Consequential Orders Following Hearing (winding Up Order Made)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant a stay of the winding up order
  2. 2 Whether to appoint joint liquidators at this stage
  3. 3 Allocation of costs of the winding up petition

Ratio Decidendi

The court ordered the company wound up under Section 177(1)(d), refused to grant a stay at this stage, stayed the Section 228A miscellaneous proceedings because compulsory winding up was proceeding, directed that CAL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED pay the costs of the winding up petition, adjourned the appointment of joint liquidators, and ordered no costs in respect of the Miscellaneous Proceedings insofar as costs had been duplicated.

Court Disposition

Winding up order made under Section 177(1)(d); stay refused at this stage; Section 228A proceedings stayed; costs allocated

Orders

  • Order for winding up under Section 177(1)(d) of the Companies Ordinance (Cap.32)
  • No stay of the winding up at this stage