Re: Wong Chi Yeung and Ex Parte: Li Yuet Sang
Read the full judgment text of HCB 2234/1999 on BabelCite. This HCB judgment was delivered on 10 January 2000.
1. This is a bankruptcy petition based on an unpaid judgment debt in the amount of $301,600. The judgment in default of defence was obtained on 25 January 1999. It would appear that prior to that date, the debtor had applied for legal aid. Legal aid was refused on 24 February 1999. It is not apparent why those proceedings were not stayed since a legal aid application was pending. Be that as it may, it is quite clear that the debtor had notice of the proceedings.
|
HCB002234/1999 HCB2234/1999 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS NO.2234 OF 1999 ------------
-------------- Coram: Hon Le Pichon J in Court Date of Hearing: 10 January 2000 Date of Judgment: 10 January 2000 ----------------------- J U D G M E N T ----------------------- 1. This is a bankruptcy petition based on an unpaid judgment debt in the amount of $301,600. The judgment in default of defence was obtained on 25 January 1999. It would appear that prior to that date, the debtor had applied for legal aid. Legal aid was refused on 24 February 1999. It is not apparent why those proceedings were not stayed since a legal aid application was pending. Be that as it may, it is quite clear that the debtor had notice of the proceedings. 2. He made a second application for legal aid on 28 April 1999. That application was refused in June 1999. In respect of the present bankruptcy proceedings, the debtor applied once more for legal aid which has also been refused. 3. No steps have been taken to set aside the judgment obtained in default notwithstanding the fact that the debtor has had notice of those proceedings for almost a year. The judgment was based on two promissory notes. No grounds have been advanced for setting it aside. 4. The debtor claims that he is able to pay the judgment debt as he is the beneficial owner of two flats, but that the petitioner has refused to transfer the properties into his name. There is no evidence before this court of payment for those flats, and in fact, if I have understood his evidence correctly, the debtor has not yet paid for the flats. 5. It is the debtor's case that he purchased those properties in 1987 and 1993. We are now in the year 2000. If he does have a valid claim to the properties as he now asserts, he would have taken steps long before now to have those properties transferred into his name. He has not shown that he has any valid defence to the High Court action such as to warrant my granting leave for him to apply to set aside the judgment obtained out of time. Short of having the judgment set aside, he has no basis for opposing the petition. 6. For these reasons, I will make a bankruptcy order. The petitioner is entitled to the costs of the petition.
Representation: Mr Tam Tak Wing of Messrs Ong & Chung, for the Petitioner Debtor in person, present Miss Kitty Tsui, for the Official Receiver |