Re Lo Ching Foon

Read the full judgment text of HCB 3661/2020 on BabelCite. This HCB judgment was delivered on 7 December 2020.

1. This is the hearing of a bankruptcy petition against the debtor, Mr Lo Ching‑foon. The petition is based on a final judgment obtained by the petitioner bank against three defendants, including the debtor, in April 2020, which in turn was based on outstanding banking facilities advanced by the bank to the pharmacy business which were guaranteed by the debtor. The debt of over $7.2 million has not been disputed by the debtor at the previous hearing of the petition before a judge. The debtor exp

Case No.HCB 3661/2020[2021] HKCFI 39
Court
HCB
Date07 Dec 2020
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCB 3661/2020

[2021] HKCFI 39

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS NO 3661 OF 2020

____________

 

IN THE MATTER of a Statutory Demand dated the 27th day of April 2020 at the instance of CITIBANK, N.A. (花旗銀行)

____________

Re:  LO CHING FOON (羅政歡)  Debtor
EX-PARTE:  CITIBANK, N.A. (花旗銀行), of 50th Floor,  Petitioner
  Champion Tower, Three Garden Road,  
  Central, Hong Kong  

____________

Before: Hon G Lam J in Court
Date of Hearing: 7 December 2020
Date of Judgment: 7 December 2020

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

1.This is the hearing of a bankruptcy petition against the debtor, Mr Lo Ching‑foon. The petition is based on a final judgment obtained by the petitioner bank against three defendants, including the debtor, in April 2020, which in turn was based on outstanding banking facilities advanced by the bank to the pharmacy business which were guaranteed by the debtor. The debt of over $7.2 million has not been disputed by the debtor at the previous hearing of the petition before a judge. The debtor expressly accepted there was no dispute over the debt.

2.The petition had been adjourned for two weeks, at the request of the debtor, to give him a last opportunity to resolve the matter with the petitioner. There had in fact been two proposals, one in mid‑September 2020 and another one in late November 2020, for the repayment by the bankrupt of the petitioner’s debt.  The first proposal was accepted by the petitioner but no repayment was made according to the repayment schedule by the debtor.  The second proposal appears to be no more than a business plan of the dispensary company run by the debtor.

3.As I said, the bankrupt was given a last chance to try to resolve the matter by agreement but he has evidently failed to do so and has not even appeared in court this morning.  In these circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to a bankruptcy order and there will therefore be the usual bankruptcy order with costs.  The Official Receiver’s costs will be paid out of the deposit.

(Discussion on costs)

4.The costs of the petition including all costs previously reserved will be paid out of the estate.

(Godfrey Lam)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court

Miss V Wong, of Wilkinson & Grist, for the Petitioner

The Debtor was not represented and did not appear

Ms Cindy Li, instructed by the Official Receiver