Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Corporate guarantees

Legal area

Court

5 Jun 2006

RE LEADKEEN INDUSTRIAL LTD

Citation

RE LEADKEEN INDUSTRIAL LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW472/2005

Because the debts were due and unpaid, insolvency was undisputed, HSBC had assigned its debts necessitating substitution of the petitioner, and the provisional liquidators reported no reason to continue provisional liquidation, the court ordered the substitution and made winding-up orders against the three companies with petitioners' costs to be paid out of company assets.
5 Jun 2006

RE MOULIN GLOBAL EYECARE TRADING LTD

Citation

RE MOULIN GLOBAL EYECARE TRADING LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW471/2005

The court ordered winding up because the companies were undisputedly insolvent, demanded debts remained unpaid, the provisional liquidation’s purpose had largely been achieved (sale of the main asset was effectively completed), and substitution of the petitioner was appropriate so that the creditor entitled to pursue the petitions could obtain final winding-up orders to adjudicate proofs of debt and effect distributions to unsecured creditors.
5 Jun 2006

RE MOULIN GLOBAL EYECARE HOLDINGS LTD

Citation

RE MOULIN GLOBAL EYECARE HOLDINGS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW470/2005

HSBC had assigned its debts and was no longer a creditor; Standard Chartered was properly substituted as petitioner; the companies were shown to be insolvent with debts unpaid, the provisional liquidators identified no reason to continue provisional liquidation, and therefore the court must wind up the companies to permit adjudication of proofs and distribution of assets, with the petitioner's costs payable out of company assets.
11 Mar 1997

SHENZEN SHEKOU GREAT OCEAN SHIPPING CO. LTD. v. STRIDER 9 LTD.

Citation

SHENZEN SHEKOU GREAT OCEAN SHIPPING CO. LTD. v. STRIDER 9 LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP4183/1996

Plaintiff took reasonable and adequate steps to notify and serve; service on registered office was valid; the draft bill of costs justifiably supports the security amount; no evidence justified acceptance of a guarantee by an associated company; therefore the original order for security for costs is appropriate and the defendant's summons to set aside is dismissed.

Hong Kong Case Law

RE LEADKEEN INDUSTRIAL LTD

RE MOULIN GLOBAL EYECARE TRADING LTD

RE MOULIN GLOBAL EYECARE HOLDINGS LTD

SHENZEN SHEKOU GREAT OCEAN SHIPPING CO. LTD. v. STRIDER 9 LTD.