Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Disallowance of liquidator's fees

Legal area

Court

27 Jul 2010

RE STANDARD CURTAIN FACTORY LTD

Citation

RE STANDARD CURTAIN FACTORY LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW344/2005

The court found that Mr Nedderman had effectively abandoned his office by leaving Hong Kong without arranging continuation of his practice, thereby prejudicing creditors; this constituted 'cause shown' under s.196(1) and warranted removal, disallowance of his fees, appointment of competent replacement provisional liquidators/liquidators (BDO Limited), delivery of books and accounts and an award of costs of $3,085 to the Official Receiver in respect of each application.
27 Jul 2010

RE AMERY CONSTRUCTION WATERPROOFING CO, LTD

Citation

RE AMERY CONSTRUCTION WATERPROOFING CO, LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW124/2005

Mr Nedderman's abandonment of his office and failure to ensure continuity of the liquidation process constituted sufficient cause under s.196(1) for removal; removal and replacement by suitably available liquidators was necessary to protect creditor interests, and disallowance of his fees was appropriate given his failure to perform his office and resulting prejudice to creditors.
27 Jul 2010

RE YUE XIU METALS & MINERALS CO LTD

Citation

RE YUE XIU METALS & MINERALS CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW444/2005

Given the statutory provision in s.196(1) and relevant authorities, Mr Nedderman's disappearance from Hong Kong and failure to put in place arrangements to allow continuation of the liquidation constituted 'cause shown' to remove him; on that basis the court removed him and his co-liquidators, disallowed his fees for failing to carry out the office and causing prejudice to creditors, appointed BDO nominees as replacement provisional liquidators or liquidators, ordered delivery of books and filing of a schedule of disbursements, and ordered costs of $3,085 per application payable by Mr Nedderm…
27 Jul 2010

RE MILLION FORTUNE INVESTMENT LTD

Citation

RE MILLION FORTUNE INVESTMENT LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW479/2005

Mr Nedderman's disappearance from Hong Kong and the cessation of his firm's operation constituted 'cause shown' under s.196(1) because it prevented proper administration, prejudiced creditors, and therefore warranted removal of Mr Nedderman and his co-liquidator, disallowance of his fees, appointment of competent replacements, orders for delivery of books and a timetable for filing disbursements, and an award of costs against him.
27 Jul 2010

RE TCM DEVELOPMENT CO LTD

Citation

RE TCM DEVELOPMENT CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW505/2004

Given credible evidence that Mr Nedderman had left Hong Kong, ceased to operate his firm and failed to make arrangements enabling proper performance of the office, the court found cause under s.196(1) to remove Mr Nedderman and his co‑liquidator, disallowed his fees for failure to carry out the office properly, appointed Mr Kong Chi‑hau Johnson and Mr Lo Siu‑kei of BDO Limited as joint and several provisional liquidators/liquidators, ordered delivery of all books and documents and permitted filing of a schedule of disbursements within prescribed times, and ordered costs of $3,085 per applicat…
27 Jul 2010

RE SUNRISE DESIGN & DECORATION (HK) LTD

Citation

RE SUNRISE DESIGN & DECORATION (HK) LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW725/2005

Mr Nedderman’s apparent departure from Hong Kong and failure to make arrangements for the proper conduct of his office amounted to cause shown under s.196(1) Companies Ordinance to remove him and his co-liquidators; replacement provisional liquidators/liquidators should be appointed and his fees disallowed because his failure prejudiced creditors and he did not properly carry out his office; orders for delivery of books and a time-limited filing of disbursements and payment of costs were also appropriate.
27 Jul 2010

RE POWER PACKING & REMOVAL CO LTD

Citation

RE POWER PACKING & REMOVAL CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW836/2004

The court found that Mr Nedderman's disappearance from Hong Kong and failure to make arrangements for the proper conduct of his office constituted 'cause' under s.196(1) of the Companies Ordinance; removal was therefore justified, his fees were disallowed because his failure to carry out the office prejudiced creditors, and replacement provisional liquidators were appointed with orders for delivery of books, filing of disbursement schedules and payment of costs by Mr Nedderman.
1 Dec 2006

RE WELL BOND GROUP LTD

Citation

RE WELL BOND GROUP LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW389/1998

Mr Krause was removed because he engaged in serious, persistent breaches and failed to perform statutory and court-imposed duties; under s196(1) and r48(2) the court exercised its supervisory discretion to remove him, appoint replacement liquidators, require delivery of books/accounts/bank records and repayment of funds, disallow his fees while permitting approved disbursements, and order costs against him to protect unsecured creditors and the integrity of the winding up.