RE GOLDLORY RESTAURANT LTD
The court holds that s196(2) and rule 146(2) afford the court an unfettered discretion and that the percentage basis applicable to the Official Receiver is not the default for private liquidators in summary winding-ups; as a matter of practice the time cost basis should be adopted and provided for at the time a...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- RE GOLDLORY RESTAURANT LTD
- Parties
- Official Receiver: Official Receiver; Liquidator: Alvarez & Marsal Asia Limited; Liquidator: Baker Tilly Hong Kong Business Recovery Limited; Liquidator: Kenny Tam & Co.; Liquidator: Gallant Y.T. Ho & Co.; Company: Goldlory Restaurant Limited; Company: DOUBLE MIND COMPANY LIMITED; Company: SOBUN SERVICES LIMITED; Company: REGENT DELTA LIMITED; Company: SUN DENKI (H.K.) COMPANY LIMITED; Company: FU KONG (HOLDINGS) COMPANY LIMITED; Company: APEX COMPUTRONICS COMPANY LIMITED; Company: CHINA GUANGDONG REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT LIMITED; Company: CHAMPION PEAK (GROUP) LIMITED; Company: HARVEST SUMMIT LIMITED; Company: PROFIT FORWARD DEVELOPMENT LIMITED; Company: CORNFIELD INVESTMENT LIMITED; Company: HING WONG ENTERPRISES COMPANY LIMITED; Company: CENTRE OCEAN INVESTMENT LIMITED; Company: MANSION SURVEYORS LIMITED; Company: LUCKY FORTUNE RESTAURANT COMPANY LIMITED; Company: HEADWELL LIMITED; Company: KEENWAY RESOURCES LIMITED; Company: MAJORWORLD LIMITED; Company: ELEGANT GARMENTS & TEXTILES LIMITED; Company: CROWN LUXE DEVELOPMENT LIMITED
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 7 July 2006
- Case Number
- HCCW36/2003
- Procedural Posture
- Company Winding Up (summary) / Decision on Referred Issue (chambers)
- Outcome
- Issue determined: court rejects percentage basis as default in summary cases and directs that as matter of practice time cost basis should be adopted and specified when summary procedure order is made.
- Legal Topics
- Liquidator Remuneration, Summary Winding Up, Companies Ordinance S227 F, Companies Ordinance S196(2), Companies (winding Up) Rules R146(2)
- 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
Official Receiver
Official Receiver
Alvarez & Marsal Asia Limited
Liquidator
Baker Tilly Hong Kong Business Recovery Limited
Liquidator
Kenny Tam & Co.
Liquidator
Gallant Y.T. Ho & Co.
Liquidator
Goldlory Restaurant Limited
Company
DOUBLE MIND COMPANY LIMITED
Company
SOBUN SERVICES LIMITED
Company
REGENT DELTA LIMITED
Company
SUN DENKI (H.K.) COMPANY LIMITED
Company
FU KONG (HOLDINGS) COMPANY LIMITED
Company
APEX COMPUTRONICS COMPANY LIMITED
Company
CHINA GUANGDONG REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT LIMITED
Company
CHAMPION PEAK (GROUP) LIMITED
Company
HARVEST SUMMIT LIMITED
Company
PROFIT FORWARD DEVELOPMENT LIMITED
Company
CORNFIELD INVESTMENT LIMITED
Company
HING WONG ENTERPRISES COMPANY LIMITED
Company
CENTRE OCEAN INVESTMENT LIMITED
Company
MANSION SURVEYORS LIMITED
Company
LUCKY FORTUNE RESTAURANT COMPANY LIMITED
Company
HEADWELL LIMITED
Company
KEENWAY RESOURCES LIMITED
Company
MAJORWORLD LIMITED
Company
ELEGANT GARMENTS & TEXTILES LIMITED
Company
CROWN LUXE DEVELOPMENT LIMITED
Company
Procedural Posture
Company Winding Up (summary) / Decision on Referred Issue (chambers)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether remuneration of liquidators appointed under s227F in summary winding-ups should be assessed on a percentage (commission) basis as default or on a time cost basis
- 2 Whether the court must treat the percentage basis under rule 146(2) as the default absent special circumstances
- 3 Whether the court has an unfettered discretion under s196(2) to fix remuneration and whether a uniform practice should adopt time cost basis in summary cases
Ratio Decidendi
The court holds that s196(2) and rule 146(2) afford the court an unfettered discretion and that the percentage basis applicable to the Official Receiver is not the default for private liquidators in summary winding-ups; as a matter of practice the time cost basis should be adopted and provided for at the time a summary procedure order under s227F is made.
Court Disposition
Issue determined: court rejects percentage basis as default in summary cases and directs that as matter of practice time cost basis should be adopted and specified when summary procedure order is made.
Orders
- Time cost basis to be adopted as the standard basis of remuneration for liquidators in summary winding-up cases (s227F) and to be provided for upon making of the summary procedure order
- Costs of earlier hearing reserved; Official Receiver and participants to inform the court by letter within 7 days what order as to costs they will seek
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment