Read the full judgment text of CACV 2980/2001 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 14 November 2002 before Rogers VP, Le Pichon JA, Suffiad J.
Civil law – trust money – lease deposit – liquidation of landlord – tracing – whether liquidators must pay over trust money to tenant – Private International Law – trust monies paid into bank account of company that subsequently goes into liquidation – Court of Appeal – application by plaintiff to join Provisional Liquidators as defendants – whether the deposit paid into the 1st defendant's bank account was trust money under the lease – held, yes, the deposit was trust money, as already determined by the Court of Appeal in its judgment of 30 July 2002 – whether the court should order the sum of HK$426,475 (deposit plus interest) held by the liquidators to be paid to the plaintiff despite the liquidators' contention that the money could not be directly traced – held, yes, the court should order payment – authority applied: Space Investments Limited v CIBC [1986] 1 WLR 1072 (Privy Council), where Lord Templeman made observations on trust monies paid into a bank account – court had ample authority to order payment – 1st defendant was in liquidation and the joint provisional liquidators had set aside HK$426,475 representing the deposit plus interest – the plaintiff, represented by its director Mr Lachlan Christie acting in person, agreed there was no further purpose in pursuing the application to join the Provisional Liquidators as defendants for the present time – the 1st defendant and the Joint Provisional Liquidators were represented by Mr A T Reyes SC, instructed by Messrs Allen & Overy – outcome: order made that HK$426,475 plus any further accrued interest be paid to the plaintiff.
Legal issues: Whether trust money deposited into a now-liquidated company's bank account should be ordered to be paid out to the plaintiff despite the liquidators' claim that the money cannot be directly traced
Outcome: The court ordered the sum of HK$426,475, representing the trust deposit plus interest, together with any further interest accrued, to be paid by the 1st defendant's Joint Provisional Liquidators to the plaintiff. The plaintiff accepted there was no purpose in pursuing the application to join the Provisional Liquidators as defendants for the present time.
Cited by 2 cases