ALAN CHUNG WAH TANG AND ANOTHER v. LEE SIU FONG AND ANOTHER

ALAN CHUNG WAH TANG AND ANOTHER v. LEE SIU FONG AND ANOTHER

The court construed paragraph 2 of the s.29 Order as requiring production of documents of the Schedule 3 companies only insofar as they related to matters in Schedules 1 and 2 (ambiguity resolved for defendants), but nevertheless found beyond reasonable doubt that the Defendants were in contempt: they failed to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 3683
Parties
Plaintiff (joint and Several Trustee in Bankruptcy of the Property of Lee Siu Fung Siegfried): Alan Chung Wah Tang; Plaintiff (joint and Several Trustee in Bankruptcy of the Property of Lee Siu Fung Siegfried): Hou Chung Man; 1st Defendant (sister of the Bankrupt): Lee Siu Fong; 2nd Defendant (sister of the Bankrupt): Leelalertsuphakun Wanee
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
21 December 2022
Case Number
HCMP1106/2021
Procedural Posture
Committal Proceedings for Contempt of a S.29 Bankruptcy Ordinance Order / Judgment and Directions for Sentencing/mitigation
Outcome
Defendants found guilty of contempt on four grounds: breach of paragraph 2 (failure to produce specified documents), breach of paragraph 2 and 4 by delay in producing documents and filings, breach of paragraph 4 by failing to address Missing Items, and breach of paragraph 4 by failing to account for unavailable...
Legal Topics
Section 29 Bankruptcy Ordinance, Production of Documents, Private Examination, Construction of Court Orders, Delay in Compliance, Adequacy of Affidavits/affirmations
Source Language
en
Bankruptcy Contempt of Court Civil Procedure Company Law Insolvency Section 29 Bankruptcy Ordinance Production of Documents Private Examination +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan Chung Wah Tang

Plaintiff (joint and Several Trustee in Bankruptcy of the Property of Lee Siu Fung Siegfried)

Hou Chung Man

Plaintiff (joint and Several Trustee in Bankruptcy of the Property of Lee Siu Fung Siegfried)

Lee Siu Fong

1st Defendant (sister of the Bankrupt)

Leelalertsuphakun Wanee

2nd Defendant (sister of the Bankrupt)

Procedural Posture

Committal Proceedings for Contempt of a S.29 Bankruptcy Ordinance Order / Judgment and Directions for Sentencing/mitigation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper construction of paragraph 2 of the s.29 Order
  2. 2 Whether defendants breached paragraph 2 by failing to produce corporate documents
  3. 3 Whether defendants breached paragraph 4 by failing to file adequate affirmations and account for unavailable documents

Ratio Decidendi

The court construed paragraph 2 of the s.29 Order as requiring production of documents of the Schedule 3 companies only insofar as they related to matters in Schedules 1 and 2 (ambiguity resolved for defendants), but nevertheless found beyond reasonable doubt that the Defendants were in contempt: they failed to produce specified corporate documents within 21 days, delayed compliance for years, failed to address numerous items in their 2020 affirmations, and failed adequately to account for documents no longer in their possession, thus breaching paragraphs 2 and 4 of the s.29 Order and satisfying the requisite state of mind for civil contempt.

Court Disposition

Defendants found guilty of contempt on four grounds: breach of paragraph 2 (failure to produce specified documents), breach of paragraph 2 and 4 by delay in producing documents and filings, breach of paragraph 4 by failing to address Missing Items, and breach of paragraph 4 by failing to account for unavailable...

Orders

  • Originating summons adjourned to a date within four months for mitigation, sentencing and costs with 2 hours reserved
  • Each Defendant granted leave to file an affirmation on mitigation within 21 days