Re Bunzo Suzuki

HCB011671/2001

HCB 11671/2001

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS NO. 11671 OF 2001

____________

Re: BUNZO SUZUKI

Ex Parte: YUNG SING TAK ALAN, a creditor

____________

Coram: Hon Kwan J in Court

Date of Hearing: 15 April 2002

Date of Judgment: 15 April 2002

______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1.The petitioner brought this petition against the debtor, Mr Bunzo Suzuki, seeking repayment of two loans. The first loan was made in US dollars and the amount is US$2,865,526.99 with interest of US$1,531,221.06 calculated up to 5 November 2001. The total amount due on the US dollar loan is approximately US$4.3 million. The second loan is in Japanese Yen and the amount is ￥1,990,373,500.00. The interest on this loan calculated also up to 5 November 2001 is ￥289,094,934.53. The total amount due on the loan in Japanese Yen is about ￥2.3 billion.

2.The statutory demand herein was served personally on the debtor on 9 November 2001. The petition herein was filed on 5 December 2001 and it was served on the debtor personally the same day. On 15 February 2002 the debtor sent to the court a document called Notice by Debtor of Intention to Oppose Petition, this document has not been filed in court. In that notice, the debtor set out his grounds to oppose the petition and there are two grounds. Firstly, he alleged that a substantial part of the debt was transferred to BVI companies owned by the petitioner Mr Alan Yung Sing Tak and the debtor, pursuant to an oral agreement made by the parties, hence he should not be liable for payment of that part of the debt. No particulars of the amount allegedly transferred or of the BVI companies were set out in the Notice. Secondly, the debtor alleged that the debts claimed in the petition is not accurate because the petitioner has failed to take into account certain repayments the debtor had made to the petitioner at various points in time. Again, no particulars were given in the Notice of the sums allegedly repaid and the dates on which such repayments were made.

3.When the matter first came before me on 25 February 2002, I have sought to clarify with the debtor the matters which are unclear in the allegations he put forward in his aforesaid Notice.

4.The debtor informed the court that part of the debt transferred to the BVI companies came up to roughly ￥2.3 billion. If that allegation were established, that would mean that the petitioner cannot rely on the loan made in Japanese Yen to found his petition. That still leaves the loan made in US dollars of approximately US$4.3 million.

5.The debtor informed the court that the repayments he had made to the petitioner were in the sums of US$2 million and ￥50 million. I was told by the petitioner's solicitor that when the sum of ￥50 million is converted to US currency, this would amount to about US$373,245.00. Hence, on the debtor's allegation, there would still be a balance of US$1,926,755.00 outstanding on the US dollar loan.

6.The debtor however disagreed with the conversion rate and calculation adopted by the petitioner's solicitor. According to him, the balance outstanding on the US dollar loan would only be about US$1.74 million. The debtor also indicated he would need about 4 weeks to arrange payment of this sum.

7.As according to the debtor's allegation, there is at least a sum of US$1.74 million indisputably due to the petitioner, I made an order on 25 February 2002 that the petition is to be adjourned to 29 April 2002 on condition that the debtor is to pay into court US$1.74 million by 8 April 4.00 p.m. I further ordered that if the debtor should fail to comply with the payment into court, the petition would be restored for hearing on 15 April 2002, upon confirmation by the petitioner's solicitors by 12 April 2002 that the condition of payment into court has not been complied with.

8.I also gave directions for the debtor to file and serve his affirmation in opposition by 8 April 2002 and I gave leave for the petitioner to file and serve evidence in reply two weeks thereafter.

9.I understand from the petitioner's solicitor that no payment into court has been made by the debtor. Further, the debtor has not filed any evidence in opposition up to today. The debtor has also not appeared at the hearing today. In the circumstances, I make a bankruptcy order with costs to the petitioner.

Representation:

Mr Charles Allen of Messrs Simmons & Simmons, for the Petitioner

The Debtor: acting in person, absent

Mrs Lam, for the Official Receiver