RE MASTER GLORY GROUP LTD

RE MASTER GLORY GROUP LTD

Because the company produced an affirmation more than six months after the petitions were issued and only on the morning of the hearing, without recent audited financial statements or adequate detail to show a realistic prospect of rescuing the company, the court refused to adjourn and made a winding-up order in HCCW 363/2019 while dismissing the other two petitions with specified costs directions.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1141
Parties
Petitioner: Petitioners; Company/respondent: Master Glory Group Limited; Supporting Creditor: Citizens Money Lending Corporation Limited; Supporting Creditor: CW Financing Limited; Supporting Creditor: Advance Tech Limited; Intervener/official Receiver: Official Receiver
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
1 June 2020
Case Number
HCCW363/2019
Procedural Posture
Companies Winding Up Proceedings / Hearing and Decision on Three Petitions (heard Together)
Outcome
Winding-up order made in HCCW 363/2019; HCCW 364/2019 and HCCW 365/2019 dismissed with costs directions
Legal Topics
Winding Up, Statutory Demand, Adjournment, Costs
Source Language
EN
Company Law Insolvency Civil Procedure Winding Up Statutory Demand Adjournment Costs

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Petitioners

Petitioner

Master Glory Group Limited

Company/respondent

Citizens Money Lending Corporation Limited

Supporting Creditor

CW Financing Limited

Supporting Creditor

Advance Tech Limited

Supporting Creditor

Official Receiver

Intervener/official Receiver

Procedural Posture

Companies Winding Up Proceedings / Hearing and Decision on Three Petitions (heard Together)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether petitions to wind up should be adjourned pending realization of assets in the Mainland
  2. 2 Whether the evidence put forward by the company was timely and sufficiently particularised to justify an adjournment
  3. 3 Appropriate disposal and costs orders where a listed company fails to oppose a petition adequately

Ratio Decidendi

Because the company produced an affirmation more than six months after the petitions were issued and only on the morning of the hearing, without recent audited financial statements or adequate detail to show a realistic prospect of rescuing the company, the court refused to adjourn and made a winding-up order in HCCW 363/2019 while dismissing the other two petitions with specified costs directions.

Court Disposition

Winding-up order made in HCCW 363/2019; HCCW 364/2019 and HCCW 365/2019 dismissed with costs directions

Orders

  • Winding-up order made in HCCW 363/2019.
  • One set of costs to be paid in favour of the supporting creditors who appeared.