LEUNG SO HUNG SIEM v. CARSON WEN

LEUNG SO HUNG SIEM v. CARSON WEN

The petition succeeds because the three costs orders underpinning the First Statutory Demand are validly enforceable judgments and the debtor failed to demonstrate any fraud, collusion or miscarriage of justice or to substantiate a genuine, substantial crossclaim; late and irrelevant evidence filed after the hearing was excluded as abuse; amendment of the petition was permitted only to delete the incorrect phrase about the Second Statutory Demand, and the Second Statutory Demand could not be relied upon as it was outstanding when the petition was presented.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1079
Parties
Debtor: Leung So Hung Siem; Petitioning Creditor: Carson Wen
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 June 2020
Case Number
HCB4036/2018
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Petition / Judgment and Disposal of Interlocutory Summonses
Outcome
Bankruptcy order made against the debtor; debtor's applications to adduce further evidence and to set aside matters dismissed; limited amendment of petition allowed.
Legal Topics
Statutory Demand, Bankruptcy Petition, Set Aside, Costs Orders, Amendment of Petition, Admission of Evidence, Crossclaim, Jurisdiction
Source Language
EN
Bankruptcy Civil Procedure Costs Evidence Contract Law Appeal Statutory Demand Bankruptcy Petition +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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leung So Hung Siem

Debtor

Carson Wen

Petitioning Creditor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Petition / Judgment and Disposal of Interlocutory Summonses

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the petition is valid given a pending application to set aside a statutory demand at time of presentation
  2. 2 Whether the judgment debts (costs orders) can be impugned on grounds of fraud, collusion or miscarriage of justice
  3. 3 Whether the debtor should be permitted to adduce further evidence after the hearing

Ratio Decidendi

The petition succeeds because the three costs orders underpinning the First Statutory Demand are validly enforceable judgments and the debtor failed to demonstrate any fraud, collusion or miscarriage of justice or to substantiate a genuine, substantial crossclaim; late and irrelevant evidence filed after the hearing was excluded as abuse; amendment of the petition was permitted only to delete the incorrect phrase about the Second Statutory Demand, and the Second Statutory Demand could not be relied upon as it was outstanding when the petition was presented.

Court Disposition

Bankruptcy order made against the debtor; debtor's applications to adduce further evidence and to set aside matters dismissed; limited amendment of petition allowed.

Orders

  • Bankruptcy order to be made against Ms Leung So Hung Siem.
  • Summonses of 9 December 2019 and 31 December 2019 dismissed with costs to the petitioner (order nisi).