Re HING WAH BLANKET COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER

Re HING WAH BLANKET COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER

Orders under s.221 should, in normal circumstances, be made on notice to the person to be examined; making such orders ex parte and withholding the liquidator's report and exhibits from the proposed examinee is not justified absent specific, demonstrated reasons. If confidentiality is necessary it must be justified to the judge and access may be conditioned on undertakings, but secrecy as a default practice is unacceptable.

Citation
Re HING WAH BLANKET COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER
Parties
Company (in Voluntary Liquidation): Hing Wah Blanket Company Limited; Company (in Voluntary Liquidation): Webetter Investments Limited; Applicant: Joint & Several Liquidators; Respondent (proposed Examinee): Former director (unnamed)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 October 1994
Case Number
HCMP2745/1994
Procedural Posture
Companies Ordinance S.221 Examination Application / Interlocutory Application in Chambers (adjourned)
Outcome
Application not granted as presented; adjourned and to be entertained only after notice of time and place served on the proposed examinee; no order for secrecy of the liquidator's report and annexures was made
Legal Topics
Liquidation, Examination on Oath, Confidential Exhibits, Ex Parte Applications, Service/notice
Source Language
EN
Company Law Civil Procedure Liquidation Examination on Oath Confidential Exhibits Ex Parte Applications Service/notice

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hing Wah Blanket Company Limited

Company (in Voluntary Liquidation)

Webetter Investments Limited

Company (in Voluntary Liquidation)

Joint & Several Liquidators

Applicant

Former director (unnamed)

Respondent (proposed Examinee)

Procedural Posture

Companies Ordinance S.221 Examination Application / Interlocutory Application in Chambers (adjourned)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an application under s.221 should be made ex parte or on notice to the person to be examined
  2. 2 Whether a liquidator's report and annexures may be kept secret from the person to be examined
  3. 3 Whether secret exhibits on ex parte applications can form the basis of a court order

Ratio Decidendi

Orders under s.221 should, in normal circumstances, be made on notice to the person to be examined; making such orders ex parte and withholding the liquidator's report and exhibits from the proposed examinee is not justified absent specific, demonstrated reasons. If confidentiality is necessary it must be justified to the judge and access may be conditioned on undertakings, but secrecy as a default practice is unacceptable.

Court Disposition

Application not granted as presented; adjourned and to be entertained only after notice of time and place served on the proposed examinee; no order for secrecy of the liquidator's report and annexures was made

Orders

  • Application to examine adjourned; court will hear the application only after notice of the time and place has been served on the proposed examinee
  • No order made to keep the liquidator's report and annexures secret; examinee entitled to see the material unless court is shown a specific justification for confidentiality