Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Turner principle

  • 21 Aug 2025

    RE LEE ON WAI

    Citation
    [2025] HKCFI 3764
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB3359/2025

    The petitioners were entitled to a usual bankruptcy order because the debtor failed to file the mandatory Notice under rule 68 and therefore the petition could be treated as uncontested, the matters raised had been finally determined in earlier proceedings and were barred by res judicata/issue estoppel (Turner principle), service of the petition on the debtor on 25 July 2025 complied with statutory service rules, and the alleged material change of circumstances was speculative and insufficient to justify reopening or adjournment.

  • 24 Jul 2025

    RE YUNG MAN TUNG

    Citation
    [2025] HKCFI 3216
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB2185/2025

    The debtor failed to show a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds and did not comply with rule 68; having failed to set aside the statutory demand previously, he is barred by res judicata and the Turner principle from re‑litigating or raising new arguments at the petition stage, and no exceptional circumstances justified an adjournment; therefore a bankruptcy order was made.

  • 4 Dec 2023

    RE TONG NAI KAN

    Citation
    [2023] HKCFI 3125
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB4735/2023

    Debtor failed to discharge the burden of showing a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds; having not complied with the statutory demand he is deemed insolvent under s.6A(1)(a); res judicata and the Turner principle bar him from reviving or introducing arguments at the petition stage that were or could have been raised on the application to set aside the statutory demand; jurisdiction and security arguments do not defeat the Petition; bankruptcy order granted.

  • 23 Jun 2022

    RE YIP KIM PO

    Citation
    [2022] HKCFI 1912
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB4531/2021

    Debtor was precluded by the prior determination on the application to set aside the statutory demand (issue estoppel/res judicata and Turner public policy) from raising the limitation defence at the petition hearing; accordingly the debtor's stay summons was dismissed and the petition proceeded, and the court held that in the bankruptcy context the term "action" under s.4(1)(a) of the Limitation Ordinance is sufficiently broad to encompass the two‑stage statutory demand/petition process.