In a first in Hong Kong, the Companies Court has recently sanctioned a creditors' scheme of arrangement proposed by a Bermuda-incorporated, Hong Kong-listed company by approving an alternative process pursued by the company and its provisional liquidators so as to overcome the constraints in Re Legend International Resorts Ltd [2006] 2 HKLRD 192; that in Hong Kong, provisional liquidators cannot be appointed for the sole purpose of restructuring a company.

In a precedent-setting decision delivered on 8 February 2018, the Hong Kong Court of First Instance has granted a recognition order in favour of foreign liquidators appointed in an insolvent liquidation commenced by a shareholders' resolution.

Experienced insolvency practitioners in Hong Kong are all familiar with Hong Kong Court of Appeal's decision of 1 March 2006 in the liquidation of Legend International Resorts Limited1.

We have previously reported that the Official Receiver retains its entitlement to ad valorem fees on the conversion of a compulsory liquidation  to a creditors’ voluntary winding-up (CVL).

Did you know that a liquidator of a foreign company may seek the assistance of the Hong Kong Court to obtain orders for the production of information which orders are, in substance, of the type made in Hong Kong windings-up under section 221(3) of the Companies (Winding-up and Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance?

Under Hong Kong law, the courts’ jurisdiction is ordinarily territorial in nature. A plaintiff or applicant has to obtain permission (“leave”) of the court before it can validly serve a writ or other document initiating a legal action on a defendant or respondent located outside Hong Kong. For actions begun by writ, the procedures and criteria for applications for leave in this respect are set out under Order 11 of the Rules of the High Court (“RHC”).

Generally with a winding-up petition, if the petitioner is successful in obtaining a winding-up order, the petitioner will have its costs of the  proceedings. If, on the other hand, the petition is dismissed, then the petitioner has been  unsuccessful and it should pay the costs of the proceedings. We explore the Companies Court’s  treatment of costs in three recent decisions below.

From what Assets should a Petitioner have its Costs?

Did you know that dispositions of property of a solvent company made after the commencement of a winding-up will unlikely be disturbed unless it can be demonstrated that the disposition is not in the interests of the company?

Did you know that in the recent matter of Chan Kam Cheung v. Sun Light Elastic Ltd & Another¹ the petitioner's alternative remedy for winding-up was struck out by the court?

Did you know...that in urgent circumstances, the court may treat the presentation of a winding-up petition to the judge hearing the application for the appointment of provisional liquidators as being sufficient without the petition in fact having been presented at the office of the court registrar.