24 Oct 2016
The court concluded that the company was self-evidently insolvent, that the new defence (maturity extension) was unlikely to have merit and had already been raised in prior proceedings, and that it was not appropriate to extend time for filing opposition evidence; accordingly a winding-up order should be made.
3 Oct 2016
The appeal is dismissed because the arbitration tribunal had considered and rejected Perfect Direct's factual defences and determined issues going to the validity of the 2010 guarantee and Mr Yu's entitlement; an enforcement order has been granted and not challenged; therefore res judicata and the proper exercise of the court's discretion justified the master's order to release the subject convertible notes, and no irremediable prejudice to Perfect Direct was shown.
18 May 2016
On the facts there was no credible evidence that PW knew or ought to have known of any improper purpose or lack of authority by Chung; the board and shareholders had approved the Agreement and Note; the defendant failed to particularize a bona fide triable defence; accordingly summary judgment was proper and specific performance ordered.
19 Mar 2015
The summons was dismissed because the plaintiff failed to appear and, substantively, had no legal basis to obtain the first two injunctions as a shareholder; with respect to promissory note no.7 the relevant proprietary interest and cause of action lay with Mr Hyon (the note's possessor), rendering the plaintiff without standing to seek the requested relief; the court declined to strike out parts of the writ because defects were potentially curable by joinder.
29 May 2013
The court held that the defendants' asserted prior oral term was inherently unbelievable and inconsistent with the commercial context and the express entire agreement clause and clause 8.2 granting the noteholder absolute discretion; the alleged term was too vague to form a binding obligation and there was no evidence of post-contractual conduct amounting to waiver or estoppel; therefore there was no genuine dispute of fact and summary judgment was entered for the plaintiff in both actions.
29 May 2013
The alleged prior oral term was not believable in the factual and contractual context, was inconsistent with the clear written terms (including an entire agreement clause and an express clause giving the noteholder absolute discretion), and was too vague to found a binding obligation; there was no post-contract conduct establishing waiver or estoppel. Therefore there was no real triable issue and summary judgment was entered for the plaintiff for repayment of the convertible notes with interest and costs.
23 May 2008
The court permanently stayed the winding-up because the material creditors whose claims gave rise to the winding-up had been discharged by settlement and release, the provisional liquidators raised no objection, the Official Receiver reported no adverse matters, and the applicant undertook to meet the provisional liquidators' expenses; these facts justified exercise of the s.209 discretion to stay the winding-up.
12 Jul 1999
The court refused immediate discharge and exercised case management to require affidavits in opposition by 2:00 p.m. on 15 July and fixed hearings on 16 and 19 July to determine the limited issues (ability to honour undertakings and alleged abuse of process), thereby preserving the injunctions pending those hearings.