Re Golan Ltd. (Company No. 635519)

Re Golan Ltd. (Company No. 635519)

Because a judgment debt existed, the Court of Appeal dismissed the stay application and the company failed to take required steps (including payment into court and making submissions), the petitioner was entitled ex debito justitiae to a winding up order under Section 177; accordingly the court made the usual winding up order.

Citation
Re Golan Ltd. (Company No. 635519)
Parties
Petitioner: Unspecified Petitioner (judgment creditor); Company (subject): Golan Limited (Company No. 635519); Interested Party: Official Receiver
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 June 2001
Case Number
HCCW990/2000
Procedural Posture
Companies Winding Up Proceedings / Hearing on Petition for Winding Up Order (court of First Instance Decision)
Outcome
Winding up order made
Legal Topics
Winding Up, Statutory Demand, Judgment Debt, Stay of Execution, Illegality and Duress
Source Language
EN
Company Law Insolvency Civil Procedure Winding Up Statutory Demand Judgment Debt Stay of Execution Illegality and Duress

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Unspecified Petitioner (judgment creditor)

Petitioner

Golan Limited (Company No. 635519)

Company (subject)

Official Receiver

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Companies Winding Up Proceedings / Hearing on Petition for Winding Up Order (court of First Instance Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the company is unable to pay its debts under s.177 of the Companies Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether a judgment debt obtained by alleged illegality or duress precludes a winding up order
  3. 3 Effect of the company's failure to comply with undertakings and to pay into court following a granted stay

Ratio Decidendi

Because a judgment debt existed, the Court of Appeal dismissed the stay application and the company failed to take required steps (including payment into court and making submissions), the petitioner was entitled ex debito justitiae to a winding up order under Section 177; accordingly the court made the usual winding up order.

Court Disposition

Winding up order made

Orders

  • Make the usual winding up order under Section 177 of the Companies Ordinance (Cap.32).