Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Official receiver

  • 20 May 2020

    RE GW ELECTRONICS CO LTD

    Citation
    [2020] HKCA 316
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV24/2017

    The Court held that because disputed facts on solvency and liabilities remained unresolved the Court could not order a permanent stay; it stayed the Winding-up Order for 28 days to permit an interested party to apply to the Companies Court under s.209(1) Cap.32 (extending the stay pending that determination), directed that if no application is made the appeal will be dismissed, and ordered the Company to pay the costs of the appeal to TEAL to be taxed if not agreed.

  • 22 Oct 2018

    RE CHINA SUNERGY (HONGKONG) CO LTD

    Citation
    [2018] HKCFI 2399
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCCW175/2018

    Because the Company filed no evidence and had been given a last opportunity to resolve the matter, the court was entitled to make the normal winding-up order and to direct that the Official Receiver's costs of $8,900 be paid out of the petitioner's deposit with the balance returned to the petitioner.

  • 29 Jan 2018

    MAK MEI KI ANGELA v. MAK CHI TAT AND OTHERS

    Citation
    [2018] HKCFI 493
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCCW284/2017

    Because the petition, re-amended and supported by a Registrar's certificate, stood unopposed and the court was satisfied that the statutory grounds under s177(1)(b) and (f) Cap 32 (and relevant provisions of Cap 622) justified winding up, a winding-up order was made and costs were allocated to the respondents with the Official Receiver's specified costs paid from the petitioner's deposit.

  • 10 Dec 2008

    TUNG KEE GARDEN HORTICULTURE LTD v. SUNLIGHT CONSTRUCTION CO LTD

    Citation
    TUNG KEE GARDEN HORTICULTURE LTD v. SUNLIGHT CONSTRUCTION CO LTD
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCCW455/2007

    The court exercised its discretion to stay the winding-up permanently because the director had provided funds equal to the company's stated liabilities to the Official Receiver, the petitioner agreed to meet Official Receiver's and provisional liquidators' costs leaving no outstanding liabilities, no proofs of debt had been lodged by any creditor, and the provisional liquidators filed Form D2 (Final) indicating no matters requiring a s.168I(3) report, thereby justifying a full stay of the proceedings.

  • 13 Mar 2006

    KO SIN YUN v. CHAN CHUEN

    Citation
    KO SIN YUN v. CHAN CHUEN
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB4824/2005

    Leave was granted to withdraw the petition and the court ordered costs against the debtor to the petitioner because the District Court proceedings had been validly served, the debtor was aware of them, failed to defend and gave no satisfactory explanation; accordingly the petitioner may recover its costs (including the Official Receiver's assessed costs) from the debtor, with the Official Receiver's costs of $8,900 to be deducted from the petitioner's deposit.

  • 5 Sept 2002

    Re Choi Sze Fai

    Citation
    Re Choi Sze Fai
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB1276/1997

    The Master found on facts that Mr. Choi failed to complete his Statement of Affairs properly, concealed information and failed to cooperate with the Official Receiver; such conduct justified suspension of the automatic discharge for three years under section 30A(3) of the Bankruptcy Ordinance; the review is dismissed and the original suspension is confirmed.

  • 29 Apr 2002

    RE FIVEOCEANS SUPPLY SERVICES LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION)

    Citation
    RE FIVEOCEANS SUPPLY SERVICES LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION)
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCCW1379/2001

    The court stayed the section 228A winding-up and ordered a compulsory winding-up so that section 182 remedies can be pursued; the usual winding-up order operates so that the Official Receiver becomes provisional liquidator under s194(1)(a); the court declined to displace the statutory role of the Official Receiver by appointing private provisional liquidators in his place and indicated the proper procedure is for the Official Receiver to appoint special managers and for creditors to confirm liquidators at the first meeting.

  • 31 Jan 2002

    KENSLAND REALTY LTD. v. WHALE VIEW INVESTMENT LTD. AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    KENSLAND REALTY LTD. v. WHALE VIEW INVESTMENT LTD. AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of Final Appeal
    Case number
    FACV10/2001

    Because respondents consistently threatened to challenge the company's locus and compelled the Official Receiver to brief counsel and attend, but then disclaimed any challenge at the hearing causing wholly wasted expense, the respondents (Whale View and TP&Y) are jointly and severally liable to pay the Official Receiver's costs incurred in attending the hearing in connection with locus standi on an indemnity basis; the separate application by Whale View to prioritize its costs against the OR in the liquidation is dismissed and the court does not decide the broader legal effect of the temporar…