RE CHAN SZE MING MICHAEL

RE CHAN SZE MING MICHAEL

The statutory demand was validly served by a combination of personal delivery at the 21 January meeting, transmission to the Specified Email which the debtor had agreed could be used, and delivery to the debtor's office; the petitioner is not a secured creditor of the debtor because the guarantees are personal; the debtor failed to specify and prove any bona fide, substantial dispute or credible contemporaneous evidence of enforceability, collateral contracts or estoppel; non‑compliance with procedural formality in the notice or service did not cause substantial injustice that could not be remedied; accordingly the petition was properly presented and a bankruptcy order was made against...

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 4401
Parties
Petitioner: The Bank of East Asia, Limited (東亞銀行有限公司); Debtor: CHAN SZE MING MICHAEL (陳思銘)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 September 2025
Case Number
HCB1385/2025
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy / Decision on Bankruptcy Petition (court of First Instance)
Outcome
Bankruptcy order made against the Debtor
Legal Topics
Statutory Demand, Service of Process, Guarantee, Secured Creditor, Estoppel, Collateral Agreement, Bona Fide Dispute, Bankruptcy Order, Bankruptcy Rules Compliance
Source Language
EN
Bankruptcy Insolvency Civil Procedure Contract Law Security Interests Statutory Demand Service of Process Guarantee +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 6 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Bank of East Asia, Limited (東亞銀行有限公司)

Petitioner

CHAN SZE MING MICHAEL (陳思銘)

Debtor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy / Decision on Bankruptcy Petition (court of First Instance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Validity and sufficiency of service of statutory demand under Bankruptcy Rules r.46 and PD3.1
  2. 2 Whether petitioner is a secured creditor vis-à-vis guarantor
  3. 3 Whether debtor disclosed bona fide disputes as required to resist bankruptcy petition

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory demand was validly served by a combination of personal delivery at the 21 January meeting, transmission to the Specified Email which the debtor had agreed could be used, and delivery to the debtor's office; the petitioner is not a secured creditor of the debtor because the guarantees are personal; the debtor failed to specify and prove any bona fide, substantial dispute or credible contemporaneous evidence of enforceability, collateral contracts or estoppel; non‑compliance with procedural formality in the notice or service did not cause substantial injustice that could not be remedied; accordingly the petition was properly presented and a bankruptcy order was made against...

Court Disposition

Bankruptcy order made against the Debtor

Orders

  • Bankruptcy order made against Chan Sze Ming Michael (陳思銘)
  • Attendance of the Official Receiver excused