RE LIU YI FANG

RE LIU YI FANG

The court held that bankruptcy jurisdiction existed because the debtor maintained a place of residence in Hong Kong (24D and other addresses supported by company records and use of SHK address); the creditor had taken all reasonable steps to bring the statutory demand to the debtor's attention (personal attempts, letters to solicitors, investigators and newspaper advertisement) and substituted service was justified because the debtor evaded service; allegations of material non‑disclosure failed; and adjournment pending appeal was refused because no stay of execution was sought.

Citation
RE LIU YI FANG
Parties
Creditor: Rich Shine Investments Limited; Debtor: Liu Yi Fang
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
26 February 2014
Case Number
HCB5613/2013
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Petition / Hearing Concluded; Bankruptcy Order Made (5 February 2014)
Outcome
Bankruptcy order made against the debtor
Legal Topics
Statutory Demand, Substituted Service, Place of Residence, Non Disclosure in Ex Parte Applications, Adjournment Pending Appeal, Summary Judgment Enforcement
Source Language
EN
Bankruptcy Civil Procedure Service of Process Jurisdiction Statutory Demand Substituted Service Place of Residence Non Disclosure in Ex Parte Applications +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 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rich Shine Investments Limited

Creditor

Liu Yi Fang

Debtor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Petition / Hearing Concluded; Bankruptcy Order Made (5 February 2014)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has bankruptcy jurisdiction under s4(1) of the Bankruptcy Ordinance based on the debtor having a place of residence in Hong Kong during the relevant 3 year period
  2. 2 Whether the statutory demand was reasonably brought to the debtor's attention under r46(2) of the Bankruptcy Rules and whether substituted service by advertisement was appropriate
  3. 3 Whether there was material non-disclosure in the ex parte applications for leave to present the petition and for substituted service

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that bankruptcy jurisdiction existed because the debtor maintained a place of residence in Hong Kong (24D and other addresses supported by company records and use of SHK address); the creditor had taken all reasonable steps to bring the statutory demand to the debtor's attention (personal attempts, letters to solicitors, investigators and newspaper advertisement) and substituted service was justified because the debtor evaded service; allegations of material non‑disclosure failed; and adjournment pending appeal was refused because no stay of execution was sought.

Court Disposition

Bankruptcy order made against the debtor

Orders

  • Bankruptcy order made against Liu Yi Fang (the debtor)
  • Summons (to file second affirmation and for specific discovery) dismissed