RE CHOY SHIU TIM

RE CHOY SHIU TIM

The petition was dismissed as an abuse of process because the petitioner failed to prove the alleged HK$21,000,000 loan had been advanced to Chiu or produce any contemporaneous evidence of remittance despite repeated requests, the guarantee did not extend to payments to Venture Smart, and the statutory demand and petition were therefore insufficient to establish an undisputed debt; indemnity costs were awarded against the petitioner.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 1338
Parties
Petitioner: CHAN WAH LIT; Debtor: CHOY SHIU TIM; Official Receiver: Official Receiver
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 March 2026
Case Number
HCB7443/2025
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Petition / Decision on Bankruptcy Petition (reasons for Judgment)
Outcome
Petition dismissed as an abuse of process
Legal Topics
Statutory Demand, Guarantee, Proof of Payment, Abuse of Process, Costs (indemnity), Rule 70
Source Language
EN
Bankruptcy Contract Civil Procedure Statutory Demand Guarantee Proof of Payment Abuse of Process Costs (indemnity) +1 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHAN WAH LIT

Petitioner

CHOY SHIU TIM

Debtor

Official Receiver

Official Receiver

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Petition / Decision on Bankruptcy Petition (reasons for Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the petitioner proved the alleged loan was actually advanced to the third party (Chiu)
  2. 2 Whether the statutory demand and petition disclosed a genuine, provable debt or whether there was a bona fide dispute
  3. 3 Whether the guarantee extended to payments made to a third party (Venture Smart)

Ratio Decidendi

The petition was dismissed as an abuse of process because the petitioner failed to prove the alleged HK$21,000,000 loan had been advanced to Chiu or produce any contemporaneous evidence of remittance despite repeated requests, the guarantee did not extend to payments to Venture Smart, and the statutory demand and petition were therefore insufficient to establish an undisputed debt; indemnity costs were awarded against the petitioner.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed as an abuse of process

Orders

  • Petition dismissed
  • Petitioner to pay costs of and occasioned by the Petition to the Debtor on an indemnity basis