中國遠洋運輸(集團)總公司 對 顧馥山

Read the full judgment text of HCMP 1861/2012 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 6 February 2013.

1. This is an application by way of an Originating Summons issued on 1 September 2012 in which the plaintiff seeks a vesting order based on section 52 of the Trustee Ordinance , Cap 29 (“Ordinance”) in respect of 11,000 deferred shares in Ocean Tramping Company, Ltd registered in the name of the defendant (“Shares”) which are held by him as trustee for the plaintiff pursuant to a Declaration of Trust dated 30 October 1990.

Cited by 1 case

Case No.HCMP 1861/2012
Court
High Court CFI
Date06 Feb 2013
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCMP1861/2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 1861 OF 2012

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

  有關遠洋輪船有限公司
Ocean Tramping Company, Limited股票
 
  受託人條例(第29章)第52條事宜
--------------------------
  中國遠洋運輸(集團)總公司 原告人
  (前稱: 中國遠洋運輸總公司)  

  顧馥山GU FU SHAN 被告人
--------------------------
Before : Hon Anthony Chan J in Chambers
Date of Hearing : 6 February 2013
Date of Decision : 6 February 2013

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

D E C I S I O N

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

1.This is an application by way of an Originating Summons issued on 1 September 2012 in which the plaintiff seeks a vesting order based on section 52 of the Trustee Ordinance, Cap 29 (“Ordinance”) in respect of 11,000 deferred shares in Ocean Tramping Company, Ltd registered in the name of the defendant (“Shares”) which are held by him as trustee for the plaintiff pursuant to a Declaration of Trust dated 30 October 1990.

2.I am satisfied on the evidence that the Shares are held by the defendant as a trustee for the plaintiff.  Further, a written request was made to the defendant by the plaintiff via its solicitors on 2 April 2012 for the transfer of the Shares.  No response to the request has been received despite the fact that it was sent to the two addresses (“Addresses”) of the defendant known to the plaintiff.

3.As regards the service of these proceedings, the evidence is clear that various attempts have been made to serve the same on the defendant at the Addresses.  In addition, pursuant to a Substituted Service Order, an advertisement in respect of these proceedings was placed in a popular Chinese newspaper dated 8 January 2013.

4.Such efforts have not produced any response from the defendant.  I am satisfied that the defendant cannot be found and it is appropriate to exercise my power under section 58 of the Ordinance to deal with these matters in the absence of the defendant. 

5.I agree with the plaintiff that a proper case has been made out pursuant to section 52(1)(b)(iii) and (iv) of the Ordinance. 

6.In the premises, I grant the following order in favour of the plaintiff:

(i)  The right to transfer the Shares, as specified in the schedule of the Originating Summons herein, and the right to receive the dividends accrued or to accrue thereon prior to the transfer of the Shares be vested in the plaintiff;

(ii)  The plaintiff may hereafter transfer the Shares to itself, or to any other person or entity as the plaintiff may desire;

(iii)  There be no order as to the costs of these proceedings. 

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

Mr Shum Cheuk Pan, of Woo, Kwan, Lee & Lo, for the plaintiff

The defendant was not represented and did not appear

Cited by 1 case

Other judgments that cite this case