YEN KIN KONG v. MOBIL OIL HONG KONG LTD.

YEN KIN KONG v. MOBIL OIL HONG KONG LTD.

Documentary evidence and surrounding negotiations contradicted applicants' assertions; applicants failed to take reasonable precautions and provided no admissible particulars of inducement; no genuine triable issue existed; applications to set aside the statutory demand were dismissed and respondent granted leave to present bankruptcy petitions.

Citation
YEN KIN KONG v. MOBIL OIL HONG KONG LTD.
Parties
Applicant (debtor): Yen Kin Kong; Applicant (debtor): Tam King Fu; Respondent (creditor): Mobil Oil Hong Kong Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 April 2000
Case Number
HCSD42/1999
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Chambers Hearing and Decision (applications Dismissed; Leave Granted to Present Bankruptcy Petitions)
Outcome
Applications dismissed; costs awarded to Respondent; leave granted to Respondent to present bankruptcy petitions against each Applicant forthwith
Legal Topics
Statutory Demand, Guarantee Liability, Non Est Factum, Misrepresentation, Entire Agreement Clause, Bankruptcy Petition, Commercial Contract Enforcement
Source Language
EN
Insolvency Contract Equity Statutory Demand Guarantee Liability Non Est Factum Misrepresentation Entire Agreement Clause +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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yen Kin Kong

Applicant (debtor)

Tam King Fu

Applicant (debtor)

Mobil Oil Hong Kong Limited

Respondent (creditor)

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Chambers Hearing and Decision (applications Dismissed; Leave Granted to Present Bankruptcy Petitions)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the guarantees signed by the applicants are void for non est factum
  2. 2 Whether the applicants were induced by misrepresentation or coercion to sign the guarantees
  3. 3 Whether actions/omissions of the creditor created a defence under a purported cooperative agreement making enforcement inequitable

Ratio Decidendi

Documentary evidence and surrounding negotiations contradicted applicants' assertions; applicants failed to take reasonable precautions and provided no admissible particulars of inducement; no genuine triable issue existed; applications to set aside the statutory demand were dismissed and respondent granted leave to present bankruptcy petitions.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed; costs awarded to Respondent; leave granted to Respondent to present bankruptcy petitions against each Applicant forthwith

Orders

  • Applications to set aside the statutory demand dismissed
  • Costs to be paid to the Respondent, Mobil Oil Hong Kong Limited