The Joint & Several Liquidators of Kong Wah Holdings Ltd (in Compulsory Liquidation) v. [Respondents]

HCCW 49/2000

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

COMPANIES (WINDING-UP) NO. 49 OF 2000

____________

____________

BETWEEN

____________

AND

HCCW 50/2000

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

COMPANIES (WINDING-UP) NO. 50 OF 2000

____________

____________

BETWEEN

and

____________

(Heard together)

Before:  Hon Kwan J in Chambers (not open to public)

Date of Hearing:  24 February 2006

Date of Decision:  24 February 2006

_______________

D E C I S I O N

_______________

1.There are two summonses issued by the liquidators of Akai Holdings Limited (“Akai”) and Kong Wah Holdings Limited (“Kong Wah”) (collectively “the Companies”) under section 221 of the Companies Ordinance, Cap. 32 in each of the proceedings against [examinee], seeking an order that he be examined on oath before a Master of the High Court, concerning the affairs and/or dealings of the Companies, and that he is to produce to the liquidators all books and records of the Companies in his possession, custody or control.

2.The applications are supported by the 21^st and 22^nd affidavits of Cosimo Borrelli, one of the liquidators.  The summonses and supporting evidence have not been served on [examinee], who is residing in Canada, but I understand from the e-mail exchanges exhibited to Mr Borrelli’s affidavit that the liquidators have kept that [examinee’s] legal advisers in New York fully informed and that [examinee] has indicated through his lawyers that he would have no objection to the orders sought by the liquidators.

3.I am satisfied from the affidavits of the liquidators that in view of the positions held by [examinee] within the [company examinee worked for] at all material times, he should be in a position to materially assist the liquidators in their investigations into the complex affairs and the many unusual and suspicious transactions of the Companies, which involved very substantial amounts.  [Respondent] would appear to have in-depth knowledge of the affairs of the Companies, particularly the key and substantial events associated with the Companies in the period leading up to their collapse.

4.I am therefore satisfied that reasonable requirement for the orders sought has been made out.  I make an order on each of the summonses taken out in the two proceedings:

(1)     The respondent do be examined, on oath, before a Master of the High Court concerning the affairs and/or dealings of the company in question.

(2)     The respondent do deliver and produce to the applicants any and all books, records, documents, correspondence and/or papers in his possession, custody and/or control relating to the company in question, its associates and/or subsidiaries whether in printed or documentary form or any other form including computer generated records and information inscribed on, stored in or otherwise fixed in a tangible medium or that is stored in an electronic or other medium that is retrievable in a perceivable form in particular computer hard disc drive, floppy disc, compact disc or zip storage device.

(3)     Leave to serve this order on the respondent out of the jurisdiction.

(4)     There be liberty to apply.

(5)     The applicants’ costs of this application be paid out of the assets of the company in question.  Save as aforesaid, there be no order as to costs.

Mr Chris Dobby, of Messrs Johnson, Stokes & Master, for the Joint and Several Liquidators

[Respondent]