LAU SIU HUNG AND ANOTHER v. CHOW SAI YIP AND ANOTHER

LAU SIU HUNG AND ANOTHER v. CHOW SAI YIP AND ANOTHER

The court accepted the respondents' credible evidence and documentary receipts showing they provided at least HK$300,000 and agreed set‑offs for unpaid occupation compensation, thereby rebutting the presumption under s.50(5); the Assignment was not a transaction at an undervalue nor an unfair preference and the trustees' summons must be dismissed.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 249
Parties
Applicants (joint and Several Trustees of the Estate of Chow Sai Cheong): LAU SIU HUNG and LIANG YANG KENG; 1st Respondent: CHOW SAI YIP; 2nd Respondent: CHOW SAI LUNG
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
8 February 2018
Case Number
HCB3640/2015
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Proceedings / Hearing on Trustees' Summons (application Under Ss.49,50,51,51 A) and Decision
Outcome
Summons dismissed
Legal Topics
Transaction at Undervalue, Unfair Preference, Rebuttal of Statutory Presumption, Set‑off, Credibility of Witnesses
Source Language
EN
Bankruptcy Insolvency Property Law Civil Procedure Evidence Transaction at Undervalue Unfair Preference Rebuttal of Statutory Presumption +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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LAU SIU HUNG and LIANG YANG KENG

Applicants (joint and Several Trustees of the Estate of Chow Sai Cheong)

CHOW SAI YIP

1st Respondent

CHOW SAI LUNG

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Proceedings / Hearing on Trustees' Summons (application Under Ss.49,50,51,51 A) and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the assignment of the bankrupt's 1/3 interest was a transaction at an undervalue under the Bankruptcy Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether payments made constituted an unfair preference by the bankrupt in favour of his brothers
  3. 3 Whether the presumption under s.50(5) of the Bankruptcy Ordinance is rebutted

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted the respondents' credible evidence and documentary receipts showing they provided at least HK$300,000 and agreed set‑offs for unpaid occupation compensation, thereby rebutting the presumption under s.50(5); the Assignment was not a transaction at an undervalue nor an unfair preference and the trustees' summons must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed

Orders

  • Summons dismissed
  • Order nisi that the costs of and occasioned by the Summons, including the Respondents' costs, be paid out of the estate of the Bankrupt