Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Income payments order

  • 22 Dec 2021

    RE HO SUET HUNG

    Citation
    [2021] HKCFI 3836
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB5205/2018

    The summons was dismissed because the Bankrupt failed to demonstrate that the Trustees' original and revised assessments of monthly living expenses were perverse or clearly wrong; although the Trustees had no proper statutory basis to require payments or to freeze the bank account without an income payments order, the Court declined to grant the relief sought because the assessments were reasonable and the Trustees undertook to unfreeze the account and ensure payment in accordance with their assessments; the Court did not decide the broader legal question whether trustees may freeze bank acco…

  • 20 Jan 2017

    RE TAM MEI KAM

    Citation
    RE TAM MEI KAM
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV197/2016

    The trustees' correspondence did not constitute a definitive act or decision with legal effect reviewable under s83 because they expressly reserved their position and had not committed to a legal stance; the application was hypothetical and academic given the circumstances, so dismissal of the s83 motion was correct and the appeal is dismissed with costs ordered against the appellant.

  • 28 Apr 2015

    TAM MEI KAM v. HSBC INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEE LTD AND OTHERS

    Citation
    TAM MEI KAM v. HSBC INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEE LTD AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP2981/2004

    Because the 3rd respondent and the trustees in bankruptcy (5th respondent) consented and the grandchildren beneficiaries raised no objection, the court found the requested HK$186,500 constituted reasonable domestic needs under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Ordinance and ordered payment from the deceased's estate, with specified apportionment and routing through the trustees in bankruptcy to respect the existing Income Payments Order.

  • 1 Apr 2015

    RE TAM MEI KAM

    Citation
    RE TAM MEI KAM
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB3777/2011

    Funeral expenses constituted reasonable financial provision and were allowed (HK$170,500) payable by specified cheques; all other applications were dismissed because the existing periodical payments (HK$158,000/month) represented reasonable provision in all the circumstances, the applicant's medical certificates were inadmissible as expert evidence, awarding large lump sums would risk prejudice to other beneficiaries (notably the residuary legatee), and there was no change of circumstances warranting payment of rent arrears which would nullify prior orders.

  • 26 Jan 2015

    TAM MEI KAM v. HSBC INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEE LTD AND OTHERS

    Citation
    TAM MEI KAM v. HSBC INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEE LTD AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP2981/2004

    The court held the order refusing the extra special maintenance was a summary determination of substantive rights and thus exempt from the leave requirement under O59 r21(1)(a); alternatively, even if leave were required, the applicant failed to show a reasonable prospect of success or any other reason in the interests of justice, so leave to appeal was denied; payment to the applicant was limited by an income payments order under s43E Bankruptcy Ordinance.

  • 10 Jul 2014

    RE TAM MEI KAM

    Citation
    RE TAM MEI KAM
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV39/2014

    Security for costs was ordered because the appellant is an undischarged bankrupt with insufficient accessible assets, there is a real risk that an adverse costs order would further deplete the bankruptcy estate, the appellant's contentions about recovery from the Karen Trust or entitlement to accrued maintenance do not constitute sufficient countervailing factors, and the appeal is not strongly meritorious; accordingly HKD 307,500 was ordered as security to be lodged within 56 days with stay and dismissal consequences for default.

  • 21 Feb 2014

    TAM MEI KAM v. HSBC INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEE LTD AND OTHERS

    Citation
    TAM MEI KAM v. HSBC INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEE LTD AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP2981/2004

    The court held that s43E permits an IPO to claim income which the bankrupt is or becomes entitled to during bankruptcy even if entitlement arose before the IPO; the words "during the period for which the order is in force" relate to enforcement of the order not to limit the definition of income in s43E(6). An IPO could therefore claim the accrued maintenance that was suspended, subject to protecting the bankrupt's reasonable domestic needs. The trustees' IPO was therefore not struck out and trustees were not removed.

  • 11 Oct 2013

    TAM MEI KAM v. HSBC INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEE LTD AND OTHERS

    Citation
    TAM MEI KAM v. HSBC INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEE LTD AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP2981/2004

    The trustees' asserted entitlement to have maintenance payments paid to them under section 43E gives them a proprietary interest in the maintenance (not merely a commercial creditor's interest) and their presence is necessary to determine the distribution of those payments; accordingly joinder was justified and trustees were granted leave to intervene and named 5th respondent.

  • 18 Jul 2012

    RE TAM MEI KAM

    Citation
    RE TAM MEI KAM
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB3777/2011

    Maintenance payments under an order of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Ordinance are personal rights analogous to matrimonial maintenance and do not form part of the bankrupt's estate; they may nevertheless be treated as "income" under section 43E and can only be claimed for the estate by an application for an income payments order; accordingly the Official Receiver was not entitled to retain payments received under the maintenance order and those payments (less statutory allowances already made) must be paid to the Bankrupt until a s43E application is made.

  • 21 Oct 2005

    RE CHOI LAI MING

    Citation
    RE CHOI LAI MING
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB4390/2002

    The court found on construction of the loan documents and CSRs and having regard to surrounding circumstances that the Government, not the FSI in its own right, was the lender and thereby a secured creditor with a charge over the debtor's salary, pension and other sums payable by the Government; accordingly the Government was entitled to continue the salary deductions to satisfy its security and the Official Receiver's claims for repayment and declaration were dismissed; moreover discharge does not impair a secured creditor's right to enforce its security under s.32(3) and a secured creditor…