SANG SANG FINANCE & INVESTMENT LTD. v. CHUEN HING CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD.

HCCW000488/2002

HCCW 488/2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

COMPANIES WINDING-UP PROCEEDINGS NO. 488 OF 2002

____________

IN THE MATTER OF CHUEN HING CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED

AND

IN THE MATTER OF the Companies Ordinance, Chapter 32

____________

BETWEEN
SANG SANG FINANCE & INVESTMENT LIMITED Petitioner
AND
CHUEN HING CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED Respondent

____________

AND

HCCW 776/2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

COMPANIES WINDING-UP PROCEEDINGS NO. 776 OF 2002

____________

IN THE MATTER OF CHUEN HING CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED

AND

IN THE MATTER OF the Companies Ordinance, Chapter 32

____________

BETWEEN
VIC-FORM COMPANY LIMITED Petitioner
AND
CHUEN HING CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED Respondent

(Heard Together)

____________

Coram: Hon Chung J in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 30 August 2002

Date of Decision: 30 August 2002

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

1. These two petitions were brought on the basis of two judgment debts which amount to about $1.1 million. Together with the claimsof other creditors, total amount of indebtedness known to the petitioners may be as much as $6.6 million odd. Some of the other creditorshave given notice that they would appear to support the petitions. Included in this total debt is the preferential debt of the company’sformer workers of about $2.2 million.

2. In these circumstances, I agree with the Official Receiver’s argument that cogent evidence as to the general solvency of the companyis essential to today’s applications (which ask for “validation” orders to be made pursuant to s. 182 of the Companies Ordinance (Cap. 32)). This is because if the company is unable to pay off the creditors, or at least make a satisfactory arrangement with themwithin a relatively short time, there is a high likelihood that the company will be wound up shortly, quite possibly on 9 September2002 by the companies judge.

3. For this reason, I do not find it appropriate to make any order in relation to today’s applications. They are accordingly dismissed.

(Andrew Chung)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court

Representation:

Miss C Ngo, instructed by Messrs Peter C Wong, Chow & Chow, for the Petitioner in HCCW 488/2002

Mr Kong Kok Lung, instructed by Messrs Li, Wong & Lam, for the Petitioner in HCCW 776/2002

Mr Richard Leung, instructed by Messrs Yuen & Partners, for the Respondent in HCCW 488/2002 and HCCW 776/2002

Miss C Yen, of Messrs Fairbairn Catley Low & Kong, for the Supporting Creditor (Pro-Fire Limited) in HCCW 488/2002

Miss Sara Chung, of Official Receiver in HCCW 488/2002 and HCCW 776/2002