Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Undervalue transactions

Legal area

Court

9 Oct 2020

OSMAN MOHAMMED ARAB AND ANOTHER v. NG SHUI CHING, IRENE AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2020] HKCA 818
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV5/2018

The Court upheld the trial judge's factual findings that genuine loans existed and that the Declaration of Trust executed on 1 November 2009 transferred the beneficial ownership of the shares to the 1st Defendant; therefore the subsequent formal transfer and the transfer of the vehicle were not at an undervalue, did not constitute unfair preference and were not made with intent to defraud creditors; the appeal was dismissed.
26 Mar 2020

HO MAN KIT and KONG SZE MAN SIMONE the Joint and Several Liquidators of ETERNAL DIAMONDS CORPORATION LTD (in creditors’ voluntary liquidation) v. SURE LEAD LTD

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 464
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2021/2018

The court exercised its discretion to vary the costs order nisi and adopt an issue-based apportionment: plaintiffs to pay the defendant's costs of and incidental to the Undervalue Claim, defendant to pay plaintiffs' costs of and incidental to the Preference Claim, costs to be taxed on a party-to-party basis if not agreed, and the apportionment between the two claims fixed at 70:30 in favour of the Undervalue Claim.
26 Oct 2018

CATHERWOOD LTD v. FENG JIN LIANG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 2383
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1052/2014

On the facts the court was not satisfied there was sufficient evidence to infer an actual intent to defraud by D1 at the time of the mortgage; alternatively, even if such intent could be inferred, D2 discharged its s60(3) burden by showing it acted in good faith and without actual or constructive notice after taking reasonable searches and enquiries; accordingly s60 CPO did not void the mortgage and the declaration sought by D2 succeeds.
12 Jan 2016

REMEDY ASIA LTD v. PATRICK TONG HING CHI AND ANOTHER

Citation

REMEDY ASIA LTD v. PATRICK TONG HING CHI AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA658/2011

The Registrar allowed plaintiffs leave to adduce expert evidence on issues 4(f) and 5(b) and allowed defendants leave on specified accounting and valuation issues after finding expert assistance necessary for disputed inter‑company accounting and valuation matters; the Registrar declined to impose the defendants' chosen single joint expert over the plaintiffs' objection, ordered separate experts for certain valuation issues (plaintiff's Colum Bancroft and defendant's Frank Yuen) with mandatory exchange, meeting and joint reporting requirements, and appointed a single joint expert (Simon Sham)…
29 Nov 2011

THE JOINT AND SEVERAL TRUSTEES of the property of KARSON OTEN FAN, KARNO (in bankruptcy) v. KONG SUK CHUN AND OTHERS

Citation

THE JOINT AND SEVERAL TRUSTEES of the property of<br>KARSON OTEN FAN, KARNO (in bankruptcy) v. KONG SUK CHUN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1101/2011

The court rejected the defendants' jurisdictional challenge: in proceedings asserting proprietary rights the court has jurisdiction to order disclosure, including historical accounts useful for tracing the plaintiff's property at interlocutory stage; the distinction between a Mareva/in personam injunction and an injunction to preserve proprietary rights is not determinative of the availability of disclosure orders in this case; the defendants' initial disclosure was unsatisfactory and further, more specific disclosure should be ordered, but temporal scope must be limited to documents and acco…
30 Jun 2004

SHANGHAI FINANCE HOLDINGS LTD v. SUN TAI CHEUNG CREDITS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

SHANGHAI FINANCE HOLDINGS LTD v. SUN TAI CHEUNG CREDITS LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA200/2004

The court exercised its discretion to admit the two late affidavits conditionally: the defendants must file supplemental affidavits identifying sources and explaining circumstances, and the plaintiff is granted leave to file affidavits in answer; the affidavits' deficiencies and disputed authenticity mean they cannot dispose of the strike‑out without further evidence, so conditional admission and adjournment are required.
31 May 2001

LO WO AND OTHERS v. CHEUNG CHAN KA, JOSEPH AND ANOTHER

Citation

LO WO AND OTHERS v. CHEUNG CHAN KA, JOSEPH AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV217/2000

The Court upheld the trial judge's finding that the sale was an unconscionable bargain obtained by reprehensible conduct and that rescission (with reimbursement and interest and consequential orders) was the appropriate equitable remedy; the appeal was dismissed and the subsequent sale did not render the relief inappropriate, the developer may seek relief under Cap.545 if necessary.
18 Jan 2000

RE: CHAN WOON WING and EX PARTE: LUN KEE POULTRY LTD. ("Company")

Citation

RE: CHAN WOON WING and EX PARTE: LUN KEE POULTRY LTD. ("Company")
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB144/2000

Court granted consent under section 42 because the sale was a pre‑petition transaction entered into before presentation of the petition, on its face bona fide with no evidence of undervalue or impropriety, and consent would not prejudice trustee's rights under section 49; refusal would unduly prejudice applicant and purchasers.
5 Jul 1996

RE PLAYMATES INVESTMENTS LTD

Citation

RE PLAYMATES INVESTMENTS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW270/1994

The court exercised its discretion to permit re-amendment because the proposed amendments raised matters necessary to decide the real controversy, abandonment of claims by prior omission is not irreversible and must be judged on the facts, and the Respondent/Opposing Contributories had not demonstrated prejudice that could not be compensated by costs. Discovery orders under O.24 r.3 were appropriate in winding-up proceedings and did not require the r.7 affidavit where the requests fall within r.3. Consequently the summons was granted in part with specified directions and timetables.