PUN CHING CHAU v. SUEN KAR CHUN AND ANOTHER

PUN CHING CHAU v. SUEN KAR CHUN AND ANOTHER

The plaintiff, as a director, was entitled under s121 to inspection and copies; the 1st defendant's conditions (restrictive timing, requirement of plaintiff's presence, refusal of photocopies and other obstructive measures) were unreasonable and amounted to effective denial, therefore the court ordered production and access on normal weekday hours and awarded costs to the plaintiff.

Citation
PUN CHING CHAU v. SUEN KAR CHUN AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Pun Ching Chau; 1st Defendant: Suen Kar Chun; 2nd Defendant: Carry Strong Dyeing Factory Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
15 June 2007
Case Number
HCMP1050/2007
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 121, Companies Ordinance for Inspection of Company Documents / Hearing and Decision in Chambers (court of First Instance)
Outcome
Application granted; court ordered production and inspection and awarded costs to the plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Inspection of Company Documents, Directors' Rights to Inspect, Companies Ordinance S121, Access to Books and Copies, Costs Order
Source Language
EN
Company Law Corporate Governance Civil Procedure Inspection of Company Documents Directors' Rights to Inspect Companies Ordinance S121 Access to Books and Copies Costs Order

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pun Ching Chau

Plaintiff

Suen Kar Chun

1st Defendant

Carry Strong Dyeing Factory Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application Under Section 121, Companies Ordinance for Inspection of Company Documents / Hearing and Decision in Chambers (court of First Instance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a director is entitled to inspect company books and records under s121 of the Companies Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the 1st defendant's imposed conditions amounted to denial of inspection or were unreasonable
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff may inspect by representatives and take copies of documents

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff, as a director, was entitled under s121 to inspection and copies; the 1st defendant's conditions (restrictive timing, requirement of plaintiff's presence, refusal of photocopies and other obstructive measures) were unreasonable and amounted to effective denial, therefore the court ordered production and access on normal weekday hours and awarded costs to the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Application granted; court ordered production and inspection and awarded costs to the plaintiff.

Orders

  • The 1st defendant is to produce to the plaintiff and give access to all books of accounts, management accounts, working papers, bank statements, cheque stubs and copies, contracts, instruments of transfer, statutory records, company documents and all documentation of the Company, at its registered office or at such...
  • The plaintiff's costs of this application are to be paid by the 1st defendant.