Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Creditor priority

Legal area

Court

2 May 2003

CIBA INTERNATIONAL LTD v. TUNG KA HUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

CIBA INTERNATIONAL LTD v. TUNG KA HUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW1193/2002

The application for a validation order was dismissed because the material established serious doubts as to the company's solvency, the proposed payment of $632,810.20 to Heirlink would constitute an unlawful preference prejudicing other unsecured creditors given the company's tight cashflow and significant unsecured liabilities, and there was insufficient credible evidence that continuation of the business would be profitable to offset the prejudice to creditors.
4 Nov 1999

RE LOK TIN (HOLDINGS) LTD.

Citation

RE LOK TIN (HOLDINGS) LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW90/1999

The court held that the petitioner's statutory entitlement to a winding up order prevailed because the respondents failed to establish exceptional circumstances: the evidence about recoverable assets was unreliable, the directors lacked credibility, and the proposed undertakings and instalment plan did not provide sufficient protection to the petitioner; accordingly a winding up order was made.
29 Oct 1999

WONG HO CHEUNG v. D.S. OFFSET PRINTING CO. LTD.

Citation

WONG HO CHEUNG v. D.S. OFFSET PRINTING CO. LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA13191/1999

The stay was refused because the applicant was a contributory not a creditor and the protective rationale for staying proceedings (to preserve equality among creditors) did not apply; the applicant failed to demonstrate that the plaintiffs' claims were not bona fide or that the plaintiffs would gain an unfair advantage; accordingly the Court declined to exercise its discretion in favour of the contributory.
19 Apr 1989

RE X10 LTD

Citation

RE X10 LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW206/1988

In the exceptional circumstances of ongoing group sale negotiations supported by a substantial deposit and creditor support, the court granted a limited adjournment to 8 May 1989 but held that parties must apply in open court, that long or repeated adjournments will not be granted without cogent reasons, and that if the scheme is not finalised the court will fix a hearing date for the petition with no further adjournments.
16 Mar 1977

THE HONG KONG AND TAIWAN TRADING CO LTD v. HONG KONG UNION TRANSPORTATION AND GODOWN CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE HONG KONG AND TAIWAN TRADING CO LTD v. HONG KONG UNION TRANSPORTATION AND GODOWN CO LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA848/1973

On the balance of documentary evidence and witness credibility the Court found that the business and godowns of Union were transferred to Kai Ming Trading Co. Ltd. (2nd Defendant) effective 1 March 1973, the statutory notice under the Fraudulent Transfer of Business Ordinance s.3 was not published, and therefore the plaintiff was entitled to judgment against the 2nd Defendant for the outstanding debt; the plaintiff's claim against the 1st Defendant failed and the 2nd Defendant's third party indemnity claim against the 1st Defendant failed for want of proof.

Hong Kong Case Law

CIBA INTERNATIONAL LTD v. TUNG KA HUNG AND OTHERS

RE LOK TIN (HOLDINGS) LTD.

WONG HO CHEUNG v. D.S. OFFSET PRINTING CO. LTD.

RE X10 LTD

THE HONG KONG AND TAIWAN TRADING CO LTD v. HONG KONG UNION TRANSPORTATION AND GODOWN CO LTD AND ANOTHER