10 Oct 1983
INCORPORATED OWNERS OF HAN PALACE BUILDING v. HO YUK-LAN AND OTHERS
- Citation
- INCORPORATED OWNERS OF HAN PALACE BUILDING v. HO YUK-LAN AND OTHERS
- Court
- District Court
- Case number
- DCCJ522/1983
Contributions under Cap.344 are statutory debts enforceable by distraint under Cap.7 and alleged mismanagement is not a defence to payment; defects in notice and appointment did not invalidate the committee's acts because omissions to serve notice were accidental and company law saving principles (s.37 Cap.344 and s.157 Companies Ordinance applied in pari materia) preserve the validity of the resolutions and authorisations, therefore warrants to distress remain valid and the applications to discharge are dismissed.