Re: Chan Tin Chi (陳天賜) and Ex Parte: The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd.

HCB000669/1999

HCB 669/99

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS NO. B669 OF 1999

______________

______________

Coram: The Hon. Mr. Justice Ribeiro in Court

Date of Hearing: 9 August 1999

Date of Reasons for Decision: 23 September 1999

______________________________

REASONS FOR DECISION

______________________________

1. On 9 August 1999, I made a bankruptcy order on the Petitioner's Petition. This was done in the course of hearing the Monday Companies and Bankruptcy List and I did not then deliver any judgment. At the request of the Debtor, I now set out the reasons for my decision.

2. The Petition was presented in respect of a debt arising out of a guarantee. The amount owing to the Petitioner bank was the sum of HK$22,682,181.22 as at 1 November 1998, with interest accruing thereon.

3. The Debtor appeared in person at the hearing. The Petitioner was represented by counsel.

4. The Debtor informed the Court that the debt was admitted but said that he had reached agreement with the Petitioner for settlement of the proceedings. He claimed to have sold a property and to have paid $1 million to the Petitioner on the previous Saturday. Counsel and solicitors for the Petitioner expressed surprise at this and I stood the case down to enable them to take instructions from their client.

5. When the proceedings resumed, the Petitioner's representatives informed me that no settlement agreement had been reached and that no payment had been made. When asked whether there was any documentary evidence of a settlement or payment, the Debtor produced only a letter from solicitors previously acting for him to the Petitioner's solicitors saying that the Debtor had entered into a provisional agreement to sell a property which was subject to certain conditions.

6. Counsel for the Petitioner confirmed that there had been negotiations since 1998 but stated that the bank was not willing to continue such negotiations. Its position was that even if the property could be sold, there would remain a substantial debt so that it would press in any event for a bankruptcy order to be made.

7. I considered that in the circumstances, the Petitioner was entitled to an Order.

Representation:

William Wong instructed by Messrs. Johnson, Stokes & Master for the Petitioner.

Chan Tin Chi, Debtor in person - present.

Remarks:
On appeal by the Debtor to the Court of Appeal: Appeal allowed. Please refer to CACV000247/1999.