Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Set aside statutory demand

Legal area

Court

10 Dec 2025

RE LUI CHUN KIT

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6194
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB5816/2024

The petition was dismissed because there exists a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds as to whether the loan was repaid; triable issues raised in HCMP 771/2023 as to repayment, the purpose of disputed payments and credibility of witnesses mean the summary bankruptcy procedure is unsuitable; the Personal Guarantee challenge was an abused/late argument and not determinative; accordingly the creditor's petition cannot succeed and costs are awarded to the debtor.
5 Nov 2025

YEUNG SO LAI v. ART EXCEL LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCA 957
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV413/2024

The exemption in Part 2 Schedule 1 para 2(a) of the Money Lenders Ordinance applies to a loan made to a company that is secured by a mortgage registered or to be registered under the Companies Ordinance irrespective of whether the registered security is provided by the borrower or a third party; accordingly the loan was an exempted loan, the respondent was not a 'money lender' in respect of that loan under the MLO, and the statutory demand was valid — the Judge's setting aside on the unlicensed money‑lender ground was wrong and is set aside, allowing the appeal.
1 Aug 2023

CCH v. CSY

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1992
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCSD6/2022

Applicant failed to discharge the burden to show a bona fide defence or a counterclaim on substantial grounds; contemporaneous documents (Loan Agreement and Settlement Agreement) demonstrate the HK$1,000,000 loan was separate and unconditional and the deposits had been dealt with under the 1st loan, therefore the statutory demand stood and should not be set aside.
29 Mar 2022

RE PACIFIC CULTURAL HOSPITALITY DEVELOPMENT (HK) LTD

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 905
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW176/2020

The petition was dismissed because the Petitioner misused winding-up proceedings: the claimed debt was not a clearly liquidated sum at the date of presentation, the statutory demand was defective in particulars, there was a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds (including variation of the payment date and non-performance by Petitioner), and the Company had a serious cross-claim that could affect entitlement to the balance; accordingly the Petitioner lacked locus to present the petition.
7 Aug 2020

RE LEE MING CHEUNG

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1945
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB607/2019

Because the statutory demand was validly served, the set aside application had been dismissed with no bona fide dispute on substantial grounds, there was no stay of the petition pending the appeal, the renewed stay lacked merit and the Court of Appeal ordered security for costs and dismissed the stay, there was no defence and no change of circumstances; accordingly a bankruptcy order was appropriate and should be made.
9 Sept 2019

RE JORA SISI OMAR

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2234
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB8127/2016

Debtor failed to rebut the prima facie evidence of indebtedness: her allegations of fraud and loss were bare, unparticularised and not supported by precise, believable evidence; prior judicial determinations rejecting her challenges operate to preclude re‑litigation; no sufficient reason exists under s104 BO to stay the petition; accordingly a bankruptcy order is appropriate and costs are awarded to the petitioner.
27 Mar 2019

PARK CHUL SOO v. SWEE KHENG BUILDING MATERIAL CO LTD

Citation

[2019] HKCA 361
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV318/2018

The applicant failed to show that (a) he had a set-off or counterclaim equal to or exceeding the SD amount and (b) there were substantial grounds to dispute the debt recorded in the audit confirmations and audited financial statements, particularly the HKD500,000 transaction; accordingly the statutory demand should not be set aside and the appeal is dismissed.
26 Nov 2018

RE PARK CHUL SOO

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 2750
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB4304/2018

The court refused to set aside the statutory demand and exercised its discretion to adjourn the petition only on condition that the debtor pay HK$1.8 million into court by the specified deadline because the debtor had not demonstrated that the grounds of appeal were likely to succeed and no affidavits or stay had been filed.
7 Nov 2018

WONG SEE YIN v. TIN WAN TUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2018] HKCA 799
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV160/2016

After a full trial the counterclaim was dismissed and that dismissal remains effective absent a stay or reversal on appeal; filing an appeal does not automatically stay the judgment; therefore there was no existing counterclaim that equalled or exceeded the statutory demand sums and the application to set aside the SDS failed; appeal dismissed with costs.
22 Aug 2017

RE LEE CHEE HO, JULEUS (aka LEE, JULEUS)

Citation

RE LEE CHEE HO, JULEUS (aka LEE, JULEUS)
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB8571/2016

The Debtor failed to show a reasonable prospect of success on appeal and produced no cogent evidence to justify a stay; the refusal to set aside the statutory demand stands and precludes re‑litigation of the same defences, therefore a bankruptcy order was appropriate and should be made with costs.