RE XING JUAN ANGELA

HCB 7247/2019

[2020] HKCFI 1801

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS NO. 7247 OF 2019

____________________________

____________________________

_____________________________________

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

_____________________________________

1.  This was a Creditor’s Bankruptcy Petition which was amended on 26 May 2020 (“Amended Petition”).

2.  The Amended Petition was based on a debt in the sum of HK$125,549.40 (“Debt”) which was made up of the taxed costs under Allocatur No. 2 dated 13 December 2017 in DCCJ No. 8 of 2015 and two sums of taxing fee in respect of Allocatur No. 1 (dated 9 November 2017) of the same action and the said Allocatur No. 2. 

3.  A Statutory Demand dated 31 October 2019 was served upon the Debtor personally on that day.  The Debtor had failed to pay the Debt, consequently the Petition was filed on 22 November 2019.

4.  The statements in the Amended Petition were verified by an Affirmation of the Creditor filed on 24 June 2020.  A Certificate of Indebtedness made by the Creditor’s solicitor was filed on 13 July 2020.

5.  At the hearing, the Debtor, who was unrepresented, said that the Debt had no legal basis.  It was explained by the court to her that the Debt was based on a costs order of the court, and such costs had been taxed.  Normally, such costs would have to be paid.  Failure to do so might result in bankruptcy proceedings. 

6.  Ample opportunities were given to the Debtor to provide a legitimate reason not to pay the Debt.  Despite the explanations of the court, the Debtor appeared reluctant to accept the legal basis of the Debt.  She also said that there was no evidence of the Debt.  However, it was pointed out to her that the Amended Petition had been verified by Affirmation. 

7.  For completeness, it was mentioned in the Debtor’s Affirmation dated 2 June 2020 (not raised by her at the hearing) that she had incurred legal costs of HK$46,000 in HCB 1418/2019.  In support, 4 receipts (dated from 1 April to 11 June 2019) from a firm of solicitors were attached to the Affirmation.  Assuming in her favour that she was entitled to recover legal costs against the Creditor, such costs had apparently not been taxed.  In any case, the amount of the costs was not sufficient to extinguish the Debt.

8.  In the absence of a viable defence to the Amended Petition, the usual Bankruptcy Order with costs was made against the Debtor.