Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Domicile and residence

  • 23 Jun 2020

    有關楊葵的事宜

    Citation
    [2020] HKCFI 1257
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB3679/2019

    The bankruptcy order was annulled because the statutory demand and bankruptcy petition were not properly brought to the debtor's attention: the creditor failed to take all reasonable steps (including inquiry at the village office and use of available email), and did not comply with the procedural requirements for substituted/newspaper service under the Bankruptcy Rules; because proper service is foundational to making a bankruptcy order, the order made on 6 November 2019 should not have been made and is annulled.

  • 12 Sept 2006

    SUNIL KHEMANEY AND ANOTHER v. VIJAY KHEMANEY

    Citation
    SUNIL KHEMANEY AND ANOTHER v. VIJAY KHEMANEY
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCAP4/2005

    The court exercised its discretion to order security for costs in the sum of HK$500,000 payable into court within 21 days, limited to costs up to completion of discovery because the 1st Plaintiff is ordinarily resident abroad, failed to disclose a full and up‑to‑date financial position or demonstrate inability to raise funds from backers, and his challenge to the Will amounted to no more than a bare allegation at this stage (preliminary expert opinion withheld as privileged and joint examination not conducted); failure to provide security will stay further proceedings.

  • 24 Mar 2004

    RE CHOW KAM FAI DAVID

    Citation
    RE CHOW KAM FAI DAVID
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV295/2003

    Order 38 r 2(3) applies to bankruptcy proceedings; the judge correctly exercised his discretion to order the respondent to attend for in-person cross-examination because the contested issues of domicile and residence required testing of subjective intention and credibility; VCF was properly refused given the respondent's prior wilful refusal to attend and the need to preserve court solemnity and immediate sanction; if the respondent fails to attend his affidavits are to be excluded.

  • 5 Jan 2000

    Re Statutory Demand served by Bangkok Bank Public Co. Ltd.

    Citation
    Re Statutory Demand served by Bangkok Bank Public Co. Ltd.
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCSD39/1999

    The application to set aside the statutory demand is dismissed because absence of domicile, residence or carrying on business in Hong Kong is not a ground to set aside a statutory demand where jurisdiction can be founded on the debtor's presence in Hong Kong on the day the petition is presented under s4(1)(b); Rule 44 was not contravened because the interest was calculated according to served Order 14 judgments; and disputes on liability should have been raised in the Order 14 proceedings.