THE OFFICIAL RECEIVER v. AU YEUNG WAI CHUNG AND OTHERS

THE OFFICIAL RECEIVER v. AU YEUNG WAI CHUNG AND OTHERS

On the agreed undisputed facts each respondent was a director of an insolvent company and engaged in conduct (trading at creditors' risk, breaches of s122, failure to submit s190 statement of affairs and failure to pay MPF) rendering them unfit under s168H(1); disqualification is therefore mandatory and, applying the Fifteenth Schedule and authorities, appropriate disqualification periods are 3, 2 and 2 years respectively with costs ordered.

Citation
THE OFFICIAL RECEIVER v. AU YEUNG WAI CHUNG AND OTHERS
Parties
Applicant: Official Receiver; 1st Respondent: AU YEUNG WAI CHUNG; 2nd Respondent: LAW SHUI FUN; 3rd Respondent: AU YEUNG KWOK HING
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 April 2008
Case Number
HCMP2508/2007
Procedural Posture
Application for Director Disqualification Under Section 168 H Companies Ordinance / Consent/carecraft Settlement Hearing and Judgment
Outcome
Disqualification orders made against all three respondents and costs ordered to the Official Receiver
Legal Topics
Director Disqualification, Accounting Records Offence, Failure to Submit Statement of Affairs, Mandatory Provident Fund Contributions, Carecraft Summary Procedure
Source Language
EN
Company Law Insolvency Law Employment Law (statutory Contributions) Director Disqualification Accounting Records Offence Failure to Submit Statement of Affairs Mandatory Provident Fund Contributions Carecraft Summary Procedure

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Official Receiver

Applicant

AU YEUNG WAI CHUNG

1st Respondent

LAW SHUI FUN

2nd Respondent

AU YEUNG KWOK HING

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Director Disqualification Under Section 168 H Companies Ordinance / Consent/carecraft Settlement Hearing and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether disqualification under s168H(1) is made out on the agreed facts
  2. 2 Whether the court is bound by parties' agreed disqualification periods under Carecraft procedure
  3. 3 Appropriate lengths of disqualification given conduct and mitigating factors

Ratio Decidendi

On the agreed undisputed facts each respondent was a director of an insolvent company and engaged in conduct (trading at creditors' risk, breaches of s122, failure to submit s190 statement of affairs and failure to pay MPF) rendering them unfit under s168H(1); disqualification is therefore mandatory and, applying the Fifteenth Schedule and authorities, appropriate disqualification periods are 3, 2 and 2 years respectively with costs ordered.

Court Disposition

Disqualification orders made against all three respondents and costs ordered to the Official Receiver

Orders

  • 1st Respondent AU YEUNG WAI CHUNG disqualified from being concerned in the management of a company for 3 years, order to take effect from the beginning of the 21st day after the date of the order
  • 2nd Respondent LAW SHUI FUN disqualified from being concerned in the management of a company for 2 years, order to take effect from the beginning of the 21st day after the date of the order