Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Section 327 companies ordinance

Legal area

Court

28 Feb 2018

CHINA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (In liquidation) v. SAMSON TSANG TAK YUNG

Citation

[2018] HKCA 111
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV197/2014

The Court of Appeal held the three core requirements inform the exercise of discretion under s.327 and are not absolute jurisdictional bars; the third requirement may be dispensed with in exceptional cases where the connection with Hong Kong and the benefits of a Hong Kong liquidation are sufficiently strong. The judge did not err in reopening the hearing, admitting fresh evidence, or in exercising his discretion to make the winding up order; the appeal is dismissed.
15 Oct 2014

RE INSIGMA TECHNOLOGY CO LTD

Citation

RE INSIGMA TECHNOLOGY CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW224/2013

The petition is dismissed because the petitioner failed to demonstrate a sufficient substantive connection between the Company and Hong Kong to justify engaging the Hong Kong insolvency regime under s327; the interest in a single Hong Kong asset (Innovation) is small relative to the Company's Mainland activities and assets, the appointment of a Hong Kong liquidator is unlikely to produce meaningful benefit or be recognised in the Mainland, and the petitioner does not satisfy the requirement of being a person subject to the Court's jurisdiction in the necessary way.
12 May 2014

WINBLESS INC v. SILVER SHADOW CO LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

WINBLESS INC v. SILVER SHADOW CO LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW369/2011

The court held that Re Yung Kee did not change the governing multi-factor test for sufficient connection under s 327 and that on the facts of these cases—direct asset holdings and activities in Hong Kong and the degree of interaction among group companies—the petitions were not clearly and obviously outside the court's jurisdiction; accordingly leave to appeal was granted only on the narrow grounds challenging application of the separate legal entity doctrine and construction of s 327 (Grounds 1–3) and refused on the remaining grounds for lacking reasonable prospects.
30 Jun 2004

RE SOLAR TOUCH LTD

Citation

RE SOLAR TOUCH LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW1001/2003

The petition was dismissed because the company demonstrated a bona fide and substantial dispute as to the debt supported by contemporaneous documents and evidence that could not be summarily rejected; alternatively, even if no bona fide dispute existed, the court would refuse to exercise its s.327 discretion because the company lacked sufficient connection with Hong Kong and there was no reasonable possibility of benefit to the petitioner since the principal assets and effective remedies lay in the PRC where Hong Kong liquidators would not be recognised.

Hong Kong Case Law

CHINA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (In liquidation) v. SAMSON TSANG TAK YUNG

RE INSIGMA TECHNOLOGY CO LTD

WINBLESS INC v. SILVER SHADOW CO LTD AND OTHERS

RE SOLAR TOUCH LTD