22 Apr 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.
2 Apr 2026
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.
13 Feb 2026
The petition was dismissed because the claimed liability was not a presently enforceable liquidated sum: the Remuneration Agreement contemplated payment by issuance of shares subject to SEHK approval and did not create an unconditional cash liability of RMB 9.4 million; furthermore the Company raised bona fide, substantial disputes supported by absence of documentary evidence of services and expenses, unresolved SEHK enquiries and questions over director authority which require full investigation at trial, rendering summary winding up inappropriate.
13 Feb 2026
The Debtor's allegation of limited English ability did not create a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds; the Debtor is bound by his signed Guarantees, failed to present a concrete repayment proposal, and therefore a bankruptcy order must be granted against him.
9 Jan 2026
Leave to appeal was refused because the plaintiff's sole ground (construction that payment must be made directly to the commercial department) is unarguable on the uncontested factual findings that the defendant's payment application was provided to and received by the plaintiff's commercial manager via an executive assistant (Mr KK Tam), and clause 4.1 does not prescribe the method of delivery; the application to adduce further evidence was refused because the material was available earlier and does not meet Ladd v Marshall criteria.
24 Dec 2025
The petition was dismissed because the company established a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds that the Waiver Deed (on its proper construction and given agency arguments) may have waived the petition debt, and because there was at least an arguable binding arbitration agreement with genuine intention to arbitrate; applying the multi-factorial discretion in Simplicity & Vogue and Guy Lam, the court declined to exercise its winding-up jurisdiction and dismissed the petition rather than stay it pending prolonged jurisdictional litigation in arbitration.
10 Dec 2025
The petition was dismissed because there exists a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds as to whether the loan was repaid; triable issues raised in HCMP 771/2023 as to repayment, the purpose of disputed payments and credibility of witnesses mean the summary bankruptcy procedure is unsuitable; the Personal Guarantee challenge was an abused/late argument and not determinative; accordingly the creditor's petition cannot succeed and costs are awarded to the debtor.
13 Nov 2025
The Amended Petition was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to prove the debt summarily: there was a complete absence of original contemporaneous documents, multiple unusual and unexplained features of the alleged transaction (advance payment before execution, large upfront interest payment, missing usual bond terms), and the Company provided believable denials and evidence giving rise to bona fide disputes on substantial grounds; therefore summary winding up was inappropriate and dismissal was ordered with indemnity costs to the Company.
5 Sept 2025
Leave to appeal was refused. The Court of Appeal held that appellate restraint applies even where first instance findings were based on affidavit evidence; the appeal court's role is review not rehearing and the Company failed to show the judge was wrong. The question whether a shareholder loan is repayable on demand is fact specific; on the facts the PBM Loan was repayable on demand and the judge's findings were not shown to be wrong.
5 Sept 2025
Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was refused. The Court held that established appellate review principles apply to winding-up appeals decided on affidavit evidence; no special de novo standard applies. The primary judge's findings that the PBM loan was repayable on demand were not shown to be wrong on appeal. Question 2 raised no point of law of general or public importance because repayment terms of shareholder loans depend on facts; audited financial statements stating 'repayable on demand' and contemporaneous documents justified the judge's conclusions. Costs were awarded to th…