Hong Kong Judgment

Court of First Instance

RE WU CHUN KWAN

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court granted the interim appointment because the Petitioners demonstrated an urgent need to protect and investigate the Debtor's estate given credible evidence of asset dissipation, evasion of service and ongoing transfers; the balance of convenience favored immediate protective intervention and the jurisdiction permits appointment of interim trustees/managers with necessary powers prior to a bankruptcy order.

Court disposition

Application granted for interim appointment

Orders

  • Interim trustee appointed over the Debtor's estate
  • Special managers appointed to manage, preserve and investigate the Debtor's assets and affairs
  • Interim appointees to be conferred with such powers as necessary to preserve assets, including any powers of a receiver
  • Relief granted on an urgent ex parte basis on notice to the Official Receiver

02

Material facts

Parties

Petitioners (judgment creditors)

Petitioner

Lam Frankie Chak Ming

Debtor

Official Receiver

Respondent

Amounts and remedies

  • Judgment Debt (approx): RMB 350,000,000
  • Payment to Then Wife for Purchase (approx): HKD 73,000,000
  • Payment to Son for Purchase (approx): HKD 27,000,000

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Bankruptcy/interim Trustee and Special Manager Appointment / Interim Appointment Application (ex Parte Application on Notice to Official Receiver)

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The Petitioners are major judgment creditors owed approximately RMB 350 million pursuant to two May 2017 judgments. The Debtor has been evading service and dissipating assets through transfers to related persons and entities, assets continue to change hands as recently as June 2019, and there is even unconfirmed information that the Debtor may have died. Urgent appointment of an interim trustee and special managers is necessary to preserve, manage and investigate the estate prior to any bankruptcy order.
Respondent
Official Receiver was given notice; no substantive opposing evidence or argument is recorded in the reasons for decision.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Bankruptcy Ordinance (Hong Kong) (statutory jurisdiction to protect estate pre-bankruptcy)

    Court may appoint an interim manager or trustee to protect a debtor's estate before a bankruptcy order is made

  2. 02

    Established insolvency practice and case law principles (equivalent considerations to appointment of provisional liquidator/interim receiver)

    Appointment of interim trustees/managers is guided by urgency and balance of convenience to prevent dissipation and preserve assets

  3. 03

    Case law example: Barker v Baxendale-Walker [2018] EWHC 2518 (Ch) and analogous authorities

    Interim appointees may be given powers including those of a receiver where necessary to protect creditors' interests

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court granted the interim appointment because the Petitioners demonstrated an urgent need to protect and investigate the Debtor's estate given credible evidence of asset dissipation, evasion of service and ongoing transfers; the balance of convenience favored immediate protective intervention and the jurisdiction permits appointment of interim trustees/managers with necessary powers prior to a bankruptcy order.

Obiter and limits

  • The appointment of an interim trustee in these circumstances is analogous to the appointment of a provisional liquidator and may include receivership-type powers where justified.
  • Case law such as Barker v Baxendale-Walker illustrates the court's willingness to grant interim protective appointments where there is a real risk to the estate and creditors' interests.

Court disposition

Application granted for interim appointment

  • Interim trustee appointed over the Debtor's estate
  • Special managers appointed to manage, preserve and investigate the Debtor's assets and affairs
  • Interim appointees to be conferred with such powers as necessary to preserve assets, including any powers of a receiver
  • Relief granted on an urgent ex parte basis on notice to the Official Receiver

Source and reliance status

Court of First Instance · 15 November 2019

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· 15 November 2019

[2019] HKCFI 2802

bjbj ioners / Lam Frankie Chak Ming Judgment Creditors ______ Before: Deputy High Court Judge William Wong SC in Chambers Date of Hearing: 7 November 2019 Date of Decision: 7 November 2019 Date of Reasons for Decision: 15 November 2019

REASONS FOR DECISION Introduction The Petitioners, the Debtor s major creditors, seek an appointment of interim trustee and special managers in respect of the Debtor. I am told that this is the second application for appointment of interim trustee and special ma w give my reasons. The Petitioners are judgment creditors the Debtor and are owed approximately RMB 350 million plus interest, pursuant to two judgments awarded in May 2017 (the Judgments ). As a matter of jurisdiction, the Court may appoint an interim manager to protect the Debtor s estate before the making of a bankruptcy order. In the present case, the Debtor s assets include a complex web of substantial interests in companies incorporated in Hong Kong and the Mainland. It is submitted that the Debtor had been dissipating assets and evading service. As a result, the Petitioners have not been able to enforce their judgment or progress the bankruptcy petition. Most recently, the Petitioners learned that the Debtor might have passed away in the autumn of 2018, but no confirmation could be obtained. Nonetheless, the Petitioners learned that the Debtor s assets were still changing hands this year, as late as June 2019. This application was made on an urgent ex parte but on notice to the Official Receiver basis because the Debtor s assets and affairs are in dire need of management, preservation and investigation. Material

facts The Debtor was a businessman carrying on the business of hotel and restaurant operation and property development mainly in the Mainland. The Petitioners are in the business of property development in Hong Kong and the Mainland. Prior to some of the transfers, the Debtor s assets included controlling shareholdings in Weldon Holdings Limited ( Weldon ), Pak Ho Hotel International Investment (HK) Limited ( Pak Ho ), China New City Holdings Limited, Guangzhou Chao Hao Restaurant Co Ltd ( GZ Restaurant ) and Kai Tak Holdings Limited ( Kai Tak ). Weldon holds 70% of the shares in Guangdong Weldon Hotel Co Ltd ( GD Weldon ), a company incorporated in the Mainland. GD Weldon holds substantive assets including a hotel in Guangzhou namely, Weldon Hotel-Guangzhou. In the course of 2010 and 2011, the Debtor borrowed money from the Petitioners. In May 2017, because of the Debtor s default, the P through Kai Tak paid approximately HK$73 million to his then wife, Madam Chan Hoi Ching ( Madam Chan ), or to her credit for the purchase of a residential property in Hong Kong. Between September 2016 and January 2017, the Debtor paid approximately HK$27 million to his son ( ) or to his credit for the purchase of a residential property in Hong Kong. In January 2017, the Debtor assigned to Madam Chan his share in a jointly owned property for no consideration. The Debtor further transferred his

shareho 018, the Petitioners issued a bankruptcy petition against the Debtor. However, the Petitioners have not been able to serve the bankruptcy petition on the Debtor because the Debtor was evading service. In February 2019, the Petitioners commenced an action under section ts with intent to defraud creditors. After the Petitioners unsuccessful attempt to serve the bankruptcy petition on the Debtor in the Mainland in September 2019, the Debtor has completely disappeared. Recently the Petitioners learnt of the Debtor s alleged demise in these circumstances: On 11 al Receiver or of any creditor or creditors, and if satisfied that the nature of the debtor s estate or business or the interests of the creditors generally require the appointment of a special manager of the estate or business other than the Official Receiver, appoint a manager thereof accordingly, who shall have such powers (including any of the powers of a receiver) as may be entrusted to him by the Official Receiver. The appointment of interim trustee is equivalent to the appointment of provisional liqui alance of convenience according to the circumstances. I am of the view that, similarly, the principal purpose of appointing an interim trustee is the urgent protection of the debtor s estate. An example is Barker v Baxendale-Walker [2018] EWHC 2518 (Ch) which concerned the appointment of interim receivers under

section gdTQ gdkBU gdkBU ~yqgqc_c[cT hLx] gd(6/ gdDg gd(6/ gd(6/ gdTQ hzZi hr9B hLx] gdDg ytG{ h!\! h!\! hS{V gd3a~ gd3a~ gd3a~ gd3a~ gd3a~ gd3a~ gd3a~ h3a~ hCvN h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ hb?H h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ hS{V h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ gd3a~ gd3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ h3a~ qhZOD " 2 N H gd)S gdyu gdyu gdL( gdL( vm]m]m hB,s h2F< h2F< h2F< h2F< hzb5 hLx] &`#$ h2F< h2F< h2F< h2F< h2F< h2F< h2F< h2F< h2F< h2F< h2F< h2F< hzb5 h2F< h2F< h2F< h2F< gd)S ytG{ & #$ mH <sH <4 & #$ [Content_Types].xml _rels/.rels theme/theme/themeManager.xml K Y, sQ}# theme/theme/theme1.xml $O}) Xp90 +PHI| PP yu 9xu5 fs+W VF7H q=. 8}d- qyI@ j!Q_ jyV` |PZ+ T ""p < 4V O&x$ A8>v ;EUC n 8r *~P(5 .}x E /,EE\} theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.rels 5 6?$Q K(M&$R(.1 [Content_Types].xmlPK _rels/.relsPK theme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK theme/theme/theme1.xmlPK theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?> <a:clrMap xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" bg1="lt1" tx1="dk1" bg2="lt2" tx2="dk2" accent1="accent1" accent2="accent2" accent3="accent3" accent4="accent4" accent5="accent5" accent6="accent6" hlink="hlink"

folHlink="folHlink"/> [Content_Types].xml dlyLho ;d]6 yJ.; _rels/.rels fLV:* ]m@= T;GI b9`5 drs/e2oDoc.xml Rz F lZzi _P}K 63*z_ y2w5HvM vHv pj~O \$K/ ,Agu iYNR :OM]D drs/downrev.xmlL 6)i6E @*\YS \DQ, [Content_Types].xmlPK _rels/.relsPK drs/e2oDoc.xmlPK drs/downrev.xmlPK [Content_Types].xml dlyLho ;d]6 yJ.; _rels/.rels fLV:* ]m@= T;GI b9`5 drs/e2oDoc.xml dGEd sC$s Am=m U#.v 5\*m <9?i3 ^]l6. H}M JL; 7 #uo: 1t9/{ drs/downrev.xmlL 6)i6E @*\YS \DQ, [Content_Types].xmlPK _rels/.relsPK drs/e2oDoc.xmlPK drs/downrev.xmlPK [Content_Types].xml dlyLho ;d]6 yJ.; _rels/.rels fLV:* ]m@= T;GI b9`5 drs/e2oDoc.xml F\0Y ldWq g-uO-\ &'^y 9F]i2 We\+ dA9O drs/downrev.xmlL 6)i6E @*\YS \DQ, [Content_Types].xmlPK _rels/.relsPK drs/e2oDoc.xmlPK drs/downrev.xmlPK [Content_Types].xml dlyLho ;d]6 yJ.; _rels/.rels fLV:* ]m@= T;GI b9`5 drs/e2oDoc.xml Y> ] #z"$ $;*" #[+% ;&:d gml;$ drs/downrev.xmlL 6)i6E @*\YS \DQ, [Content_Types].xmlPK _rels/.relsPK drs/e2oDoc.xmlPK drs/downrev.xmlPK #28&f @1z *V(= yS0J`X yS0J High Court Normal.dotm Windows User Microsoft Office Word Microsoft Title <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?><b:Sources SelectedStyle="\APASixthEditionOfficeOnline.xsl" StyleName="APA" Version="6" xmlns:b="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography" xmlns="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography"></b:Sources> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> <ds:datastoreItem ds:itemID="{E30689B5-D611-45A6-BFBE-DC54EF96C310}" xmlns:ds="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/customXml"><ds:schemaRefs><ds:schemaRef ds:uri="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography"/></ds:schemaRefs></ds:datastoreItem> Microsoft Word 97-2003 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.

Barker v Baxendale-Walker [2018] EWHC 2518 (Ch)

Case cited

Bankruptcy Ordinance (Cap. 6) (Hong Kong)

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.