Hsin Chong Construction Company Limited (in liquidation) v Build King Construction Limited [2021] HKCFA 14 (judgment dated 13 May 2021)
Introduction
China Huiyuan Juice Group Limited [2020] HKCFI 2940 (date of decision: 19 November 2020)
The Hong Kong courts have developed over time three core requirements by reference to which the court assesses whether or not a good reason for making a winding-up-order against a foreign incorporated company in Hong Kong has been demonstrated.
With data privacy issues constantly in the news, what do businesses need to know about handling personal information when they’re considering bankruptcy, especially if some personal information – like customer records – may be a valuable asset?
Shandong Chenming Paper Holdings Limited v Arjowiggins HKK 2 Limited CACV 158/2017 (date of judgment 5 August 2020)1
Introduction
With data privacy issues constantly in the news, what do businesses need to know about handling personal information when they’re considering bankruptcy, especially if some personal information – like customer records – may be a valuable asset?
Re Patrick Cowley and Lui Yee Man, Joint and Several Liquidators of the Company [2020] HKCFI 922(date of judgment: 27 May 2020)
Shenzhen Everich Supply Chain Co, Ltd (in Liquidation in the Mainland of the People's Republic of China) [2020] HKCFI 965 (date of judgment: 4 June 2020)
For the second time the Hong Kong Court has recognised a PRC winding-up proceeding and granted assistance to the administrator of a PRC company appointed by a PRC Court. The Hong Kong Court also granted the administrator an express right to take control of the company's subsidiaries in Hong Kong.
Background
China Lumena New Materials Corp (in provisional liquidation) [2020] HKCFI 338 (decision made on 23 January 2020 and reasons given on 4 March 2020)
This is the first reported scheme of arrangement in Hong Kong seeking to compromise debt governed by PRC law. Under the Gibbs Rule, a foreign composition does not discharge a debt unless it is discharged under the law governing the debt. In this case, the Hong Kong Court considered an exception to the Gibbs Rule and more generally the principles of sanctioning a scheme.
Background
Sit Kwong Lam v Petrolimex Singapore Pte. Ltd [2019] HKCA 1220案 (裁决日期：2019年11月1日)
But Ka Chon v Interactive Brokers LLC [2019] 5 HKC 238案 (裁决日期：2019年8月2日)
在Lasmos Limited v Southwest Pacific Bauxite (HK) Limited [2018] HKCFI 426一案中，当案件所涉债务是一项仲裁协议的标的时，公司法庭改变了原先在这种情况下如何裁定清盘程序的做法（被称为“Lasmos裁决”）。在近期的两起破产案件中，上诉法庭对Lasmos裁决发表了附带意见。
Lasmos案之前的裁决
上海华信国际集团有限公司（在中国大陆清算）[2020] HKCFI 167 (裁决日期：2020年1月13日)
这是香港法院首次向中国大陆法院指定的一家中国大陆公司的管理人发出承认令的案件。该案还考虑如果在送达第三债务人暂准令（garnishee order nisi）后，破产令在外国颁布，此时是否应将第三债务人暂准令转为绝对命令。
案件背景
上海华信国际集团有限公司（以下简称为“CEFC”）是一家在中国大陆注册成立的投资控股公司，是一家企业集团的一部分，该企业集团的业务包括资本融资、石油精炼和基础设施。 2019年11月，上海市第三中级人民法院（以下简称为“上海法院”）下令CEFC破产清算，并指定了联合管理人（以下简称为“管理人”）。
CEFC的资产包括对其在香港地区的子公司上海华信集团（香港）有限公司（以下简称为“香港子公司”）的重大债权，该子公司正在清算中。CEFC已就该债权提供债务证明。