19 Apr 2022
HO CHIU KING, PANSY CATILINA v. HO, ANGELA AND ANOTHER
- Citation
- [2022] HKCFI 1111
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCCA4042/2020
The court exercised its discretion under s36 PAO to pass over competing minority demands and appointed the KPMG nominees alone because KPMG are independent and competent, the appointment is supported by the overwhelming majority of beneficiaries, the asserted need for A&M as 'representation' or for complementary skills was speculative and insufficient to justify appointing a second professional firm, and appointing A&M would cause duplication and increased costs.