Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Void dispositions after commencement of winding up

Legal area

Court

17 Mar 2025

JOINT AND SEVERAL LIQUIDATORS OF HSIN CHONG CONSTRUCTION (ASIA) LTD v. WONG PO KEE LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1020
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW316/2018

Payments of the specified non-retention sums made by the employer to the three nominated sub-contractors after the commencement of the winding up constituted dispositions of the company’s property and were void under s.182; the respondents were ordered to repay those non-retention sums; retention monies paid were to be held in separate trust accounts by the applicants pending finalisation of the final account and determination of any set-offs.
4 Aug 2014

MARSHEL EXPORTS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) v. BANK OF BARODA

Citation

MARSHEL EXPORTS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) v. BANK OF BARODA
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW274/2012

The court accepted the Bank's evidence that both mortgaged properties were charged to their full value at all material times so there was no reduction of the companies' equity in those properties when the post-petition loans were advanced; therefore no disposition occurred under s182 and the applications fail.
10 Feb 2011

HKSC FOODS LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) v. O\'DEA PETER JOHN

Citation

HKSC FOODS LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) v. O\'DEA PETER JOHN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW456/2008

The payments were dispositions of the company's property made after the deemed commencement of the winding up, the respondent had knowledge of the petition, the company was insolvent, no validation order was obtained and the respondent produced no evidence to rebut the Liquidators' case; accordingly section 182 renders the 13 payments void and the respondent must repay HK$660,100 with interest and pay the Liquidators' costs.
30 Nov 2005

RE LUEN YICK WATER & DRAINAGE WORKS LTD

Citation

RE LUEN YICK WATER & DRAINAGE WORKS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW209/2002

The court granted sanction under section 199(1)(c) because the liquidators demonstrated a respectable and commercially sensible claim to recover HK$1.2M paid after the presentation of the petition, reasonable prospects of recovery (including identifiable assets of the payee), anticipated costs proportionate to the claim, and because the majority COI objections were not founded on reasons sufficient to outweigh the creditors' collective interest in pursuing recovery.
15 Nov 2005

CITIBANK (HONG KONG) LTD v. LEUNG KAI MAN

Citation

CITIBANK (HONG KONG) LTD v. LEUNG KAI MAN
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2412/2003

The payments by Grandfield via cheques to the plaintiffs were direct dispositions of the company's property to the ultimate recipients after the deemed commencement of winding up and therefore void under section 182; plaintiffs were entitled to comply with liquidators' demand and to seek recovery from the defendant who benefited; the defendant had no realistic prospect of success on appeal and leave was refused.

Hong Kong Case Law

JOINT AND SEVERAL LIQUIDATORS OF HSIN CHONG CONSTRUCTION (ASIA) LTD v. WONG PO KEE LTD AND OTHERS

MARSHEL EXPORTS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) v. BANK OF BARODA

HKSC FOODS LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) v. O\'DEA PETER JOHN

RE LUEN YICK WATER & DRAINAGE WORKS LTD

CITIBANK (HONG KONG) LTD v. LEUNG KAI MAN