Re Chiu Chit

Read the full judgment text of HCB 402/2012 on BabelCite. This HCB judgment was delivered on 24 May 2017.

1. This is the Bankrupt’s application to reverse the decisions of the Official Receiver (OR), acting as the trustee of her estate, in refusing to consent to the commencement of appeal by the Bankrupt in 3 actions, namely, DCCJ 4041/2007, which was an action between the Bankrupt and the Bank of China (Hong Kong) Ltd (BOC and 1 st Action), HCMP 2334/2009 (2 nd Action) and HCMP 584/2010 (3 rd Action).

Cites 3 cases

Case No.HCB 402/2012
Court
HCB
Date24 May 2017
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCB 402/2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS NO. 402 OF 2012

____________________________

  Re: Chiu Chit (“the Bankrupt”)  

____________________________

Before: Hon Anthony Chan J in Chambers
Date of Hearing: 24 May 2017
Date of Decision: 24 May 2017

_______________

D E C I S I O N

_______________

1.This is the Bankrupt’s application to reverse the decisions of the Official Receiver (OR), acting as the trustee of her estate, in refusing to consent to the commencement of appeal by the Bankrupt in 3 actions, namely, DCCJ 4041/2007, which was an action between the Bankrupt and the Bank of China (Hong Kong) Ltd (BOC and 1st Action), HCMP 2334/2009 (2nd Action) and HCMP 584/2010 (3rd Action).

2.I regret to say that this application is badly misconceived.  The 2nd and 3rd Actions were actually an appeal to the Court of Appeal (CA) by the Bankrupt against the refusal of the District Court for leave to appeal in the 1st Action.  That appeal, as well as the Bankrupt’s applications to the CA and the Court of Final Appeal (CFA) for leave to appeal to the CFA, were all unsuccessful. 

3.The Bankrupt says that she is in possession of fresh evidence in support of another round of appeal.  Her numerous applications for legal aid for the intended appeal had been turned down.  Her application to the Bar Association for free legal advice was rejected on the ground that the 3 Actions had been finally disposed of. 

4.For completeness, I should mention, firstly, it was the failure by the Bankrupt to pay the costs of the BOC arising from the 3 Actions which led to her bankruptcy.  Secondly, the Bankrupt had also asked the OR for consent to commence fresh proceedings, both civil and criminal, against BOC.  That request was also declined. 

5.Quite plainly, the Bankrupt is unable to accept the adjudication by the court in the 3 Actions, and she is trying all she can to have another bite at the cherry.  In these circumstances, it is plainly right for the OR to require the Bankrupt to satisfy her of the merits of the intended actions, as well as to provide an indemnity for the OR’s costs liability which may arise from such actions, before giving any consent.  None of these requirements have been met.

6.I am unable to see any merit in this application, and the Bankrupt’s Summons dated 8 August 2016 must be dismissed. I shall hear the parties on costs.

(Anthony Chan)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court

The Bankrupt appeared in person

Ms Lok Pui Man Ophelia of the Official Receiver’s Office, for the Official Receiver