RE CHIN KAM CHIU

RE CHIN KAM CHIU

After failed personal service attempts the petitioner legitimately proceeded to substituted service by post and advertisement; evidence showed the bankrupt deliberately evaded service and was aware of the hearing; the court was not obliged to issue or the petitioner to seek a body order; accordingly service was valid and there were no grounds to annul the bankruptcy order under s33(1)(a).

Citation
RE CHIN KAM CHIU
Parties
Petitioner: Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited (successor to The Kwangtung Provincial Bank); Bankrupt: Chin Kam Chiu (formerly known as Chun Kam Chiu); Official Receiver: The Official Receiver
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 April 2008
Case Number
HCB1043/2006
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy / Annulment Application Hearing (application Dismissed)
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Substituted Service, Statutory Demand, Body Order, Annulment Under S33(1)(a), Service on Prisoners, Order 49 B Examination
Source Language
EN
Bankruptcy Civil Procedure Prison Law Evidence Substituted Service Statutory Demand Body Order Annulment Under S33(1)(a) +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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited (successor to The Kwangtung Provincial Bank)

Petitioner

Chin Kam Chiu (formerly known as Chun Kam Chiu)

Bankrupt

The Official Receiver

Official Receiver

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy / Annulment Application Hearing (application Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether substituted service of the statutory demand and petition on a prisoner who refused personal service was valid
  2. 2 Whether petitioner or court should have obtained a body order under s81 Evidence Ordinance to secure attendance
  3. 3 Whether procedural defects in service or lack of opportunity to be heard required annulment under s33(1)(a) Bankruptcy Ordinance

Ratio Decidendi

After failed personal service attempts the petitioner legitimately proceeded to substituted service by post and advertisement; evidence showed the bankrupt deliberately evaded service and was aware of the hearing; the court was not obliged to issue or the petitioner to seek a body order; accordingly service was valid and there were no grounds to annul the bankruptcy order under s33(1)(a).

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Bankrupt's application for annulment dismissed
  • Bankrupt ordered to pay costs to the Petitioner