RE LI SHU CHUNG

RE LI SHU CHUNG

The court found on the evidence that the debtor had a place of residence and was ordinarily resident and domiciled in Hong Kong within the relevant 3 year period; the debtor had evaded service but had actual notice of the statutory demand and petition; there was no material non‑disclosure to the Master when leave was granted; and the proposed settlement (a charge on a 34% family company shareholding) was not a reasonable, readily realizable offer given the litigation history and the debtor's conduct—accordingly the jurisdiction and service defences and set‑aside and settlement defences failed and a bankruptcy order was made with indemnity costs to the petitioners on a nisi basis.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 2500
Parties
Petitioner/executor: LI SIN MAN SELINE; Petitioner/executor: LEE SHU HANG; Debtor: LI SHU CHUNG (李樹忠)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 October 2019
Case Number
HCB5475/2018
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Petition / Judgment on Petition and Interlocutory Applications
Outcome
Bankruptcy order made against the debtor; interlocutory applications dismissed in part
Legal Topics
Statutory Demand, Service by Advertisement and Substituted Service, Place of Residence, Ordinary Residence, Domicile, Setting Aside Ex Parte Leave, Settlement Proposal Under S.6 D BO, Strike Out Application, Indemnity Costs
Source Language
EN
Bankruptcy Civil Procedure Conflict of Laws (domicile/residence) Service of Process Costs Statutory Demand Service by Advertisement and Substituted Service Place of Residence +6 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 8 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LI SIN MAN SELINE

Petitioner/executor

LEE SHU HANG

Petitioner/executor

LI SHU CHUNG (李樹忠)

Debtor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Petition / Judgment on Petition and Interlocutory Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether court had jurisdiction under s.4 BO by residence, ordinary residence or domicile in Hong Kong
  2. 2 Whether statutory demand and petition were validly served on the debtor
  3. 3 Whether ex parte leave to issue the petition should be set aside for material non-disclosure

Ratio Decidendi

The court found on the evidence that the debtor had a place of residence and was ordinarily resident and domiciled in Hong Kong within the relevant 3 year period; the debtor had evaded service but had actual notice of the statutory demand and petition; there was no material non‑disclosure to the Master when leave was granted; and the proposed settlement (a charge on a 34% family company shareholding) was not a reasonable, readily realizable offer given the litigation history and the debtor's conduct—accordingly the jurisdiction and service defences and set‑aside and settlement defences failed and a bankruptcy order was made with indemnity costs to the petitioners on a nisi basis.

Court Disposition

Bankruptcy order made against the debtor; interlocutory applications dismissed in part

Orders

  • Bankruptcy order made against LI SHU CHUNG (the debtor)
  • Set‑aside summons to set aside ex parte leave dismissed