Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Locus to present petition

Legal area

Court

20 Aug 2020

RE REXLOT HOLDINGS LTD

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2212
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW45/2020

Substitution of the Trustee as petitioner was permitted under Rule 33 and the Trustee has locus. On balancing the competing considerations an adjournment was refused and an immediate winding-up order made because independent unsecured creditors (including major institutional creditors) unanimously supported immediate winding-up, there was insufficient independent creditor support for the Company's proposal, and the proposed concessions did not outweigh the paramount interest of unsecured creditors in an insolvent company.
12 Mar 2014

LUK PAK CHUEN v. LUK PAK SHING AND OTHERS

Citation

LUK PAK CHUEN v. LUK PAK SHING AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW116/2012

The court exercised its discretion to stay the unfair prejudice petitions until judgment in the probate action because the decisive issue — beneficial ownership of the shares — should be determined first in the probate proceedings; the outcome of that determination will determine whether the petitions can succeed.
15 Jun 2006

RE ZHUANG PP HOLDINGS LTD

Citation

RE ZHUANG PP HOLDINGS LTD
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV288/2005

The Court held that despite the existence of the Company’s cross-claim, the petitioner had sufficient locus and the petition should not be stayed or struck out because special circumstances existed—serious allegations of deliberate asset stripping to defeat creditors, the public company context and public interest, together with the Company’s delay and lack of diligence in prosecuting its action, justified allowing the winding up proceedings to proceed; appeal dismissed.
1 Mar 2006

RE LEGEND INTERNATIONAL RESORTS LTD

Citation

RE LEGEND INTERNATIONAL RESORTS LTD
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV210/2005

The Court held that (1) the petitioner qualified as an Eligible Transferee because it was proven to be an entity that lends money and thus had locus to present the winding-up petition; (2) the petition was not plainly an abuse of process; and (3) the judge below did not err in refusing to appoint provisional liquidators because the traditional basis for such appointment (assets in jeopardy/preservation of assets) had not been made out and active Philippine rehabilitation proceedings and practical obstacles meant appointment would not serve its intended protective purpose; accordingly the appe…
4 Nov 2003

RE JINRO (HK) INTERNATIONAL LTD

Citation

RE JINRO (HK) INTERNATIONAL LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW1352/2001

Although the petitioners succeeded on locus and costs should generally follow the event, the court held that a material late amendment to the petition warranted that costs occasioned by that amendment be paid by the Company. The remainder of the contested hearing costs were awarded to the petitioners, with a certificate for two counsel, to be paid out of the Company's assets. The Company's costs after the first hearing date were not ordered and therefore do not rank as costs of the petition under rule 179.

Hong Kong Case Law

RE REXLOT HOLDINGS LTD

LUK PAK CHUEN v. LUK PAK SHING AND OTHERS

RE ZHUANG PP HOLDINGS LTD

RE LEGEND INTERNATIONAL RESORTS LTD

RE JINRO (HK) INTERNATIONAL LTD