Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Section 83 bankruptcy ordinance

Legal area

Court

16 Feb 2026

RE CHU JIARU

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1047
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB8394/2020

The trustees' reply letter constituted a decision under section 83; the bankrupt failed to provide a full and effective indemnity (HK$1m plus unproven husband's indemnity was insufficient); the bankrupt failed to show there is or is likely to be a surplus and therefore lacks standing; on the materials before the trustees their refusal to consent was reasonable and not perverse; accordingly the s83 summons is dismissed.
4 Sept 2024

RE CHU JIARU

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2662
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB8394/2020

Because the trustees served the summons at the bankrupt's last known Reading address and email derived from the bankrupt's own prior filings and there was prolonged silence, failure to file a notice to act in person and no Hong Kong address for service, the court granted retrospective leave to serve, made an unless order requiring the bankrupt to state within 21 days whether she intends to pursue the section 83 application and attend the substantive hearing, and specified dismissal and costs consequences for non-compliance as a proportionate exercise of case management powers under Order 1B a…
11 Sept 2023

有關姚嘉欣的事宜

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2331
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB5165/2022

The application was dismissed because the trustee's decision to maintain the previously agreed reasonable monthly expenses and a monthly contribution of HKD3,000 was neither perverse nor plainly wrong, and the bankrupt failed to provide documentary evidence sufficient to justify varying that decision.
23 Jun 2023

RE JORA SISI OMAR

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1668
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB8127/2016

The summons under s.83 BO was dismissed because the bankrupt lacked locus standi to complain (estate insolvent, no prospect of surplus) and because the ORT's conclusions on the merits and lack of funding were reasonable and not perverse, thus the ORT decisions were upheld and the application to reverse them refused.
17 Mar 2022

有關李永業的事宜

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 764
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB4603/2019

Court accepted the trustees' analysis based on the bankrupt's own second annual statement showing an annual surplus of approximately HK$40,000, and held that requiring HK$2,000 per month was not perverse or clearly wrong; therefore the s83 application was dismissed.
29 Mar 2021

有關魏派真的事宜

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 775
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB5121/2019

The application was dismissed because the bankrupt failed to demonstrate locus standi under s83 (no evidence the estate would yield a surplus for her), the dental evidence did not show urgent medical necessity, and the trustee's decision to retain the long service payment and refuse withdrawal was not irrational such as to warrant court intervention.
10 May 2018

唐志森對黃嘉錫及黃嘉霖

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1741
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB476/2017

The application was dismissed because the trustee had properly considered the bankrupt's circumstances, increased the wife's allowance, was prepared to allow reasonable additional expenses supported by receipts, and the bankrupt had not provided receipts or made contributions; the trustee's decisions were not perverse, irrational or plainly wrong and therefore did not warrant intervention under s.83.
4 May 2018

WAN KONG SANG v. WONG KA SEK AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 960
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB3346/2017

The court held the trustee's overall assessment was reasonable but allowed a small adjustment: increase personal travelling allowance and reduce the required monthly contribution from HK$2,000 to HK$1,700. The trustee's decision to require the bankrupt to bear only 25% of the mother's combined maintenance/domestic helper expenses was reasonable given siblings are employed; the TiB decision is reversed in part and otherwise confirmed.
5 Feb 2004

RE CHUNG KAU

Citation

RE CHUNG KAU
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB581/2003

The Trustee properly required a full and effective indemnity as mandated by authority; the Bankrupt could not provide any meaningful indemnity and therefore the Trustee's refusal to permit continuation of the appeals was reasonable and not perverse, so the section 83 application was dismissed.