Hong Kong Judgment

Court of First Instance

RE GOLDCO DEVELOPMENT LTD

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Because the petitioning debt was proven and undisputed and the Company failed to appear or advance a meritorious defence or stay, the court was entitled to make a winding-up order and to direct that the Government's costs and the provisional liquidators' costs be paid out of the Company's assets.

Court disposition

Winding-up order made against Goldco Development Limited

Orders

  • Goldco Development Limited is to be wound up
  • The Government's costs of the petition are to be paid out of the Company's assets
  • The provisional liquidators' costs in this petition are to be paid out of the Company's assets

02

Material facts

Parties

Hong Kong Government

Petitioner Counsel: Miss L Chan, GC of the Department of Justice

Goldco Development Limited

Company / Respondent

Provisional Liquidators

Provisional Liquidators Counsel: Mr Jonathan Chang, instructed by Messrs Holman, Fenwick & Willan

Official Receiver

Official Receiver Counsel: Miss Karen Cheung

Amounts and remedies

  • Total Indebtedness Claimed by Government as at 31 August 2005: HKD 38,350,894.55
  • Outstanding Interim Payments Under Order of Master J Wong: HKD 22,670,576.84
  • Arrears of Rent Under Various Short Term Tenancies: HKD 15,680,317.71

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Winding Up Petition Under the Companies Ordinance, Cap. 32 / Judgment — Winding Up Order Made

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The Government petitioned to wind up Goldco on the basis the Company was unable to pay debts totalling HK$38,350,894.55 as at 31 August 2005 comprising outstanding interim payments under an earlier order and arrears of rent; the debt is not in dispute and therefore the Government is entitled to a winding-up order.
Respondent
The Company did not appear to oppose the petition and filed only an affirmation seeking a stay pending appeal against an interim payment order; the Court found the proposed appeal devoid of merits and dismissed the stay application.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Companies Ordinance, Cap. 32; applied by Kwan J (9 Jan 2006)

    A creditor who proves an undisputed debt to the company is entitled to a winding-up order where the company is unable to pay its debts

  2. 02

    Court practice and Companies Ordinance, Cap. 32; applied by Kwan J (9 Jan 2006)

    Court may appoint provisional liquidators where there is a good prima facie case for winding up; costs of petition and provisional liquidators may be directed to be paid out of the company's assets

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Because the petitioning debt was proven and undisputed and the Company failed to appear or advance a meritorious defence or stay, the court was entitled to make a winding-up order and to direct that the Government's costs and the provisional liquidators' costs be paid out of the Company's assets.

Obiter and limits

  • The application to stay the winding-up pending appeal was dismissed as the proposed appeal was devoid of merits.

Court disposition

Winding-up order made against Goldco Development Limited

  • Goldco Development Limited is to be wound up
  • The Government's costs of the petition are to be paid out of the Company's assets
  • The provisional liquidators' costs in this petition are to be paid out of the Company's assets

Source and reliance status

Court of First Instance · 9 January 2006

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court of First Instance

Judgment· 9 January 2006

RE GOLDCO DEVELOPMENT LTD

bjbj HCCW 711/2005

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE COMPANIES (WINDING-UP) NO. 711 OF 2005 ____ IN THE MATTER of the GOLDCO DEVELOPMENT LIMITED and IN THE MATTER of the Companies Ordinance, Cap. 32 of the Laws of Hong Kong ____ Before: Hon Kwan J in Court Date of Hearing: 9 January 2006 Date of Judgment: 9 January 2006 ___

J U D G M E N T ___ This is a petition to wind up Goldco Development Limited ( the Company ) presented by the Hong Kong Government, on the basis that the Company is unable to pay its debts. The Company is in the business of operation and management of fee-paying public car parks in Hong Kong. According to the petition, as at 31 August 2005, the Company was indebted to the Government of HK$38,350,894.55. This was made up of HK$22,670,576.84, being outstanding interim payments due from the Company to the Government under an order of Master J Wong on 29 April 2005 in HCA Nos. 4219 to 4221 of 2003, and HK$15,680,317.71, being arrears of rent due under various short term tenancies granted by the Government to the Company. On 27 October 2005, I made an order appointing provisional liquidators for the Company, having been satisfied that the Government has a good prima facie case for a winding-up order. The Company has not appeared in the petition nor has it filed any evidence to oppose the petition. The only evidence filed by the Company is an affirmation made by one of its directors on 26 October 2005, in support of its application to stay the winding-up petition pending an appeal to the Court of Appeal, having failed in its appeal before Deputy Judge Muttrie against the order for interim payment of Master J Wong. I have dismissed that application to stay the winding-up

petition, having come to the view that the proposed appeal is quite simply devoid of merits. I understand from the Government that no settlement has been reached with the Company in the adjournment granted in December 2005. The Government therefore seeks a winding-up order today. As the petitioning debt is not in dispute, the Government is entitled to this order. I order the Company to be wound up and that the Government s costs are to be paid out of the Company s assets. I further order that the provisional liquidators costs in this petition are to be paid out of the Company s assets. (S Kwan) Judge of the Court of First Instance High Court Miss L Chan, GC of the Department of Justice, for the Petitioner Mr Jonathan Chang, instructed by Messrs Holman, Fenwick & Willan, for the Provisional Liquidators Miss Karen Cheung, for the Official Receiver

PAGE -

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

V

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T U V 1udk 1udk i$&`G 5<>| user HCCW.dot setup Microsoft Word 9.0 Judiciary Hong Kong Title Microsoft Word Document MSWordDoc Word.Document.8

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

HCA Nos. 4219 to 4221 of 2003 (order of Master J Wong, 29 April 2005)

Case cited

Companies Ordinance, Cap. 32

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.