THE OFFICIAL RECEIVER v. CHAN HAY MUK AND OTHERS

THE OFFICIAL RECEIVER v. CHAN HAY MUK AND OTHERS

The court granted a six month extension because the Official Receiver demonstrated good reason: significant investigations remain incomplete, delay is largely attributable to respondents' non-cooperation and the allegations (substantial misappropriation and breaches of fiduciary duty) are sufficiently serious and in...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
THE OFFICIAL RECEIVER v. CHAN HAY MUK AND OTHERS
Parties
Applicant: The Official Receiver; 1st Respondent: Chan Hay Muk; 2nd Respondent: Chan Hon Wing; 3rd Respondent: Choi Tsz Keung; 4th Respondent: Lam Ming Chi
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 December 2002
Case Number
HCMP4754/2002
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Proceedings No. 4754 of 2002 (companies Ordinance) / Application for Extension of Time Under S.168 I(2); Judgment on Application
Outcome
Extension of time granted
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Disqualification Orders, Public Examination, Winding Up Proceedings
Source Language
en
Company Law Insolvency Directors' Disqualification Civil Procedure Extension of Time Disqualification Orders Public Examination Winding Up Proceedings

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Official Receiver

Applicant

Chan Hay Muk

1st Respondent

Chan Hon Wing

2nd Respondent

Choi Tsz Keung

3rd Respondent

Lam Ming Chi

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Proceedings No. 4754 of 2002 (companies Ordinance) / Application for Extension of Time Under S.168 I(2); Judgment on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant an extension of time under s.168I(2) of the Companies Ordinance to commence disqualification proceedings
  2. 2 Whether delay is attributable to the respondents and justifies extension
  3. 3 Whether public interest supports granting extension

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted a six month extension because the Official Receiver demonstrated good reason: significant investigations remain incomplete, delay is largely attributable to respondents' non-cooperation and the allegations (substantial misappropriation and breaches of fiduciary duty) are sufficiently serious and in the public interest to justify allowing further time.

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted

Orders

  • Time for commencement of proceedings under s.168H against the four respondents extended for six months from the date of the order
  • Costs of these proceedings to be in the disqualification proceedings to be brought