RE LIN QINGXIONG

RE LIN QINGXIONG

The Li Letter is not cogent fresh evidence: it is vague, unsworn, fails to state Mr Li assumed the Debtor's liabilities, and is unexplained why no affidavit or earlier evidence was produced; those deficiencies mean no exceptional circumstances under s 98 BO are made out and the rescission summons is dismissed.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 653
Parties
Debtor: Lin Qingxiong; Petitioner/creditor: Guotai Junan Securities (Hong Kong) Limited; Official Receiver (absent): Official Receiver
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 March 2021
Case Number
HCB6306/2019
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy / Application to Rescind Bankruptcy Order Under S 98 Bankruptcy Ordinance After Order Made on 3 June 2020
Outcome
Summons dismissed; bankruptcy order upheld; costs awarded to Petitioner
Legal Topics
Section 98 BO, Rescission, Fresh Evidence, Statutory Demand, Guarantee, Bona Fide Dispute
Source Language
EN
Bankruptcy Civil Procedure Evidence Contract Section 98 BO Rescission Fresh Evidence Statutory Demand +2 more

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lin Qingxiong

Debtor

Guotai Junan Securities (Hong Kong) Limited

Petitioner/creditor

Official Receiver

Official Receiver (absent)

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy / Application to Rescind Bankruptcy Order Under S 98 Bankruptcy Ordinance After Order Made on 3 June 2020

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Debtor raised a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds to defeat the bankruptcy petition
  2. 2 Whether the purported fresh evidence (Li Letter) is cogent and corroborative so as to justify rescission under s 98 BO
  3. 3 Whether there was actual release of the Debtor by the Petitioner upon Mr Li purportedly taking up the liabilities

Ratio Decidendi

The Li Letter is not cogent fresh evidence: it is vague, unsworn, fails to state Mr Li assumed the Debtor's liabilities, and is unexplained why no affidavit or earlier evidence was produced; those deficiencies mean no exceptional circumstances under s 98 BO are made out and the rescission summons is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed; bankruptcy order upheld; costs awarded to Petitioner

Orders

  • Summons dated 2 July 2020 dismissed
  • Costs to Petitioner to be taxed if not agreed and paid by the Debtor forthwith, certificate for counsel