Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Bankruptcy petition

Legal area

Court

30 Apr 2026

有關李家明的事宜

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2325
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB476/2026

A bankruptcy order was made because the debt rested on a valid and final District Court judgment and the debtor failed to comply with the statutory demand and did not adduce sufficiently precise, believable evidence of a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds; allegations of a corporate connection, structural defects and procedural unfairness were unsubstantiated and did not justify going behind the judgment or resisting the petition.
27 Apr 2026

RE CHAN CHIU SUM ROYDEN

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2255
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB6450/2025

The Debtor's defence that the Facility contravened the Money Lenders Ordinance was unarguable and frivolous; given the risk of insolvency affecting third parties and absence of any genuine dispute on indebtedness, the court exercised its discretion not to hold the parties to the exclusive jurisdiction clause and granted the usual bankruptcy orders against the Debtor and the co-guarantor, with costs to be paid out of the Debtor's estate.
22 Apr 2026

有關郭文英以勤學樂園之名營業(勤學樂園)的事宜

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2157
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB98/2026

The debt is founded on valid and enforceable court orders; the debtor did not comply with the statutory demand, failed to show a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds or provide credible evidence to impugn the judgments, and the debtor's appeals were dismissed; accordingly a bankruptcy order was proper.
8 Apr 2026

RE LEE HON PONG

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1940
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB8468/2025

The court granted the bankruptcy order because the petition was founded on an existing unchallenged summary judgment treated as prima facie evidence of indebtedness, the statutory demand was not complied with, there was no appeal or evidence of fraud, collusion or miscarriage of justice impugning the judgment, and the debtor offered no concrete proposal to address the debt.
2 Apr 2026

RE TIN SHUK CHUN

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1935
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB1289/2025

The debtor was precluded from relying on the late-amended ground because she paid the court-ordered costs less than 24 hours before the hearing, preventing the creditor from filing a reply and indicating tactical conduct; no other grounds remained and the debt established by the statutory demand stood, so a bankruptcy order was properly made.
26 Mar 2026

RE CHAN CHI SAT

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1766
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB533/2025

On the totality of the evidence the Debtor was not ordinarily resident in Hong Kong, did not have a place of residence in Hong Kong, had not carried on business in Hong Kong during the relevant three year period and, having abandoned his domicile of choice, had reverted to his domicile of origin; accordingly the conditions in section 4(1) of the Bankruptcy Ordinance were not satisfied and the court lacked jurisdiction to make a bankruptcy order, so the amended petition is dismissed; separately, the court held that service of the statutory demand by advertisement on 16 July 2024 was a reasonab…
8 Dec 2025

成都圆中侨信商贸有限公司 v. LEUNG KA CHUN

Citation

[2025] HKCA 1049
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV467/2024

The Court refused leave to adduce the Chow affirmation because the appellant failed to satisfy the Ladd v Marshall conditions: he did not show that the evidence could not with reasonable diligence have been obtained for use below, and the proposed evidence was not apparently credible; accordingly the summons to admit new evidence was dismissed and no exceptional circumstances justified exercising residual discretion to admit the evidence.
17 Nov 2025

RE YAU WING KEUNG

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5551
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB1641/2025

The court found the petitioner established a prima facie case under the Loan Deed and assignment; the respondent failed to adducesufficient cogent evidence to show the Loan Deed was a sham, that there was clear and unequivocal estoppel or waiver, or that delivery did not occur (thus limitation did not bar enforcement). Although there is a bona fide dispute that some payments were made on behalf of the lender, the quantum of those set-offs (after accounting for time-barred items and lacking evidence to depress the face value of the assigned loan) was insufficient to extinguish the petition deb…
15 Apr 2025

RE MOK TSAN SAN

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 499
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB5428/2024

The debtor failed to discharge the burden of demonstrating a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds: the common mistake plea failed because non‑completion of the mortgagee sale did not render performance impossible nor void the Facility Agreement and the contract contemplated such risks and provided specific consequences (ATE clause and guarantor obligations); the ATE had in any event occurred as evidenced by the ATE Notice; allegations and other litigations do not amount to a substantiated defence to the Demanded Sum. Consequently a bankruptcy order was appropriate and the petitioners are…
3 Apr 2025

RE YUEN HOI PO

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1454
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB5988/2024

The Debtor adduced sufficiently credible and particularized evidence that the transaction was a stock lending exercise rather than an outright sale, creating a real and substantial dispute of fact about the existence and nature of the indebtedness; consequently the summary bankruptcy procedure was unsuitable and the petition could not stand.