Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Class meetings

Legal area

Court

31 Oct 2002

RE S. MEGGA TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD.

Citation

RE S. MEGGA TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP5551/2001

Preferential creditors held statutory rights to priority that were different from ordinary unsecured creditors and therefore constituted a separate class; the Company should have convened a separate meeting for that class; because no properly constituted meeting and no requisite approval for that class occurred, the court had no jurisdiction under s.166(2) to sanction the scheme and must dismiss the petition.
3 Dec 2001

UDL ARGOS ENGINEERING & HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO. LTD. v. LI OI LIN

Citation

UDL ARGOS ENGINEERING & HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO. LTD. v. LI OI LIN
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV11/2001

The Court held that classes must be constituted by reference to the similarity of legal rights affected by the scheme; preferential creditors and internal creditors could sensibly be included in a single class where their legal rights were not so dissimilar as to prevent them consulting together; internal creditors special interests do not automatically require separate meetings and may be addressed by the Courts discretion when sanctioning; accordingly the scheme meetings were properly constituted and the sanction was lawful, so the appeals were dismissed.
9 Mar 2001

Re UDL Argos Engineering & Heavy Industries Co. Ltd.

Citation

Re UDL Argos Engineering & Heavy Industries Co. Ltd.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV260/2000

The Court refused leave because the judge correctly applied the rights test to determine that the preferential creditors before the court did not constitute a separate class entitling them to separate meetings and the monetary and public importance thresholds under section 22 were not met; accordingly there were no issues meriting leave to the Court of Final Appeal.
9 Mar 2001

Re UDL Argos Engineering & Heavy Industries Co. Ltd.

Citation

Re UDL Argos Engineering & Heavy Industries Co. Ltd.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV157/2000

Leave to appeal was refused because the preferential creditors represented in the application did not meet the HK$1,000,000 monetary threshold and no question of sufficient general public importance arose; the court correctly applied the rights test to determine that preferential creditors did not constitute a separate class entitled to separate meetings.

Hong Kong Case Law

RE S. MEGGA TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD.

UDL ARGOS ENGINEERING & HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO. LTD. v. LI OI LIN

Re UDL Argos Engineering & Heavy Industries Co. Ltd.

Re UDL Argos Engineering & Heavy Industries Co. Ltd.