Re Mui Kai Ming

Read the full judgment text of HCB 2709/2012 on BabelCite. This HCB judgment was delivered on 17 January 2013.

1. There is an application by the Petitioner to lift the stay of proceedings prescribed under the Legal Aid Ordinance, Cap 91 which is consequential upon the application by the Debtor for legal aid. Such an application was made a few days ago on 14 January 2013.

Cites 1 case

Case No.HCB 2709/2012
Court
HCB
Date17 Jan 2013
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCB 2709/2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS NO. 2709 OF 2012

------------------------

IN THE MATTER OF : THE BANKRUPTCY ORDINANCE (CAP 6)
RE:  MUI KAI MING (梅啟明) (“the Debtor”)
PETITIONER:  HSBC International Trustee Ltd (in the capacity as the sole executor and trustee named in the Will of Mui Yim Fong dated 3rd December 2003) (also in the capacity as the Trustee of the Karen Trust which is the sole devisee named in the Will of Mui Yim Fong dated 3rd December 2003) (“the Petitioner”)

-------------------------

Before : Hon Anthony Chan J in Court

Date of Hearing : 17 January 2013

Date of Decision : 17 January 2013

----------------------

D E C I S I O N

----------------------

1.There is an application by the Petitioner to lift the stay of proceedings prescribed under the Legal Aid Ordinance, Cap 91 which is consequential upon the application by the Debtor for legal aid. Such an application was made a few days ago on 14 January 2013.

2.I am quite satisfied that the application should be granted.  The legal aid application by the Debtor on 14 January 2013 is in fact the second application made by him in these proceedings.  The first one was made on 19 July 2012.  It was rejected by the Director of Legal Aid on 7 August 2012 and there has been no appeal against the rejection.  There is nothing before me to show that this second application by the Debtor has any merits or prospects of success. Further, I am satisfied that the timing of the latest application, coupled with the absence of any appeal against the rejection of the first application, demonstrate that this is nothing more than a delaying tactic by the Debtor. Accordingly, I make an order in terms of the Petitioner’s Summons dated 16 January 2013.

(Anthony Chan)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court

Ms Rachel Lam, instructed by Clifford Chance, for the petitioner

The debtor appeared in person

Cites 1 case

Cases cited in this judgment

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under HCB 2709/2012