有關張小紅的事宜

有關張小紅的事宜

Both summonses dismissed because the bankrupt lacked the necessary legal standing: she could not show her estate would have a surplus if the claim succeeded and therefore was not an 'aggrieved person' under s83, and she lacked a legitimate interest to invoke s96; additionally the trustees' decision was objectively reasonable given low prospects of recovery, jurisdictional and enforcement issues and absence of funding, and the misconduct allegations were unsupported.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 2193
Parties
Bankrupt: CHEUNG SIU HUNG CINDY (張小紅); Joint and Several Trustees of the Bankrupt's Estate: 𧝁浩賢 and 𧝁婉芬; Official Receiver: Official Receiver (破產管理署署長)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 September 2024
Case Number
HCB2775/2023
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Proceedings (applications Under the Bankruptcy Ordinance) / Interlocutory Hearing on Summonses Under S83 and S96 of the Bankruptcy Ordinance
Outcome
Both summonses dismissed
Legal Topics
Trustee Removal, Section 83 Application, Section 96 Application, Right to Litigate on Behalf of Estate, Costs
Source Language
CH
Bankruptcy Insolvency Civil Procedure Trust Law Trustee Removal Section 83 Application Section 96 Application Right to Litigate on Behalf of Estate +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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHEUNG SIU HUNG CINDY (張小紅)

Bankrupt

𧝁浩賢 and 𧝁婉芬

Joint and Several Trustees of the Bankrupt's Estate

Official Receiver (破產管理署署長)

Official Receiver

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Proceedings (applications Under the Bankruptcy Ordinance) / Interlocutory Hearing on Summonses Under S83 and S96 of the Bankruptcy Ordinance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the bankrupt is an 'aggrieved person' with standing under s83 to overturn the trustees' decision refusing permission to pursue litigation
  2. 2 Whether the bankrupt has a legitimate interest/standing to apply under s96 to remove trustees
  3. 3 Whether the trustees' decision refusing to pursue litigation was unreasonable or constituted misconduct

Ratio Decidendi

Both summonses dismissed because the bankrupt lacked the necessary legal standing: she could not show her estate would have a surplus if the claim succeeded and therefore was not an 'aggrieved person' under s83, and she lacked a legitimate interest to invoke s96; additionally the trustees' decision was objectively reasonable given low prospects of recovery, jurisdictional and enforcement issues and absence of funding, and the misconduct allegations were unsupported.

Court Disposition

Both summonses dismissed

Orders

  • Both summonses (18/4/24 and 9/5/24) are dismissed
  • Provisional costs order: the bankrupt must pay the trustees' costs of the two summonses