In a judgment handed down on 6 March 2013, the Hong Kong High Court elaborated on the guiding principles the court will follow when determining whether or not it should exercise its 'exorbitant' jurisdiction to wind up an unregistered overseas company 'which prima facie is beyond the limits of territoriality'.
Companies with certain specific connections to Hong Kong are increasingly likely to fall under Hong Kong jurisdiction and Hong Kong’s Companies Ordinance. Both creditors and debtors will benefit from the clarity provided by the recent judgment in the case Re Pioneer Iron and Steel Group. Hong Kong’s Companies Ordinance expressly provides for the possibility of petitioning to liquidate, or wind-up, companies incorporated outside of Hong Kong.
The new Hong Kong Companies Ordinance is planned to come into operation in the first quarter of 2014. This wholesale renovation of the law governing the operation of companies in Hong Kong repeals almost all of the existing provisions of the Companies Ordinance with a few exceptions, including the existing insolvency and winding-up provisions. These will remain in their current form and be retitled as the Companies (Winding Up and Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance.
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.
Did you know...that the Official Receiver retains its right to ad valorem fees (relating to pre-conversion realisations) pursuant to the Companies (Fees and Percentages) Order (Cap 32C) (“Fees Order”) on conversion of a compulsory liquidation to a creditors’ voluntary winding-up.
Did you know...
it has been argued that a factoring arrangement over invoices of a company could be challenged as a charge over book debts and thus is void against liquidators of the company unless registered under section 80 of the Companies Ordinance.
As many will know, a failure to “...do all that is reasonable for the purpose of bringing the statutory demand to the debtor’s attention...” may result in an annulment of a bankruptcy order. But how is this requirement of Rule 46 of the Bankruptcy Rules met?
Hong Kong's highest court has considered for the second time in recent years the conduct of examinations under section 221 of the Companies Ordinance. That section enables (amongst other things) a court to compel any persons whom it believes may have information concerning the affairs or dealings of a company in liquidation to be examined in private under oath.
Anglo Starlite Insurance Co. Ltd. (the "Company") was placed into provisional liquidation on 8 May 2009 following an investigation by the Hong Kong Insurance Authority ("IA"). Peter Whalley and Jan Blaauw of PricewaterhouseCoopers were appointed as joint and several provisional liquidators.
The SFC has applied to the High Court for an order directing Lehman Brothers Asia Ltd to comply with a SFC notice to produce certain records in connection with its investigation of the offer and marketing of Minibonds. The SFC notice required Lehman Brothers to produce to the SFC all documents relating to the assessment of Minibonds by an internal Lehman Brothers committee. Lawyers for Lehman Brothers objected to the production of certain documents on the ground that such documents were the subject of a claim of legal professional privilege.