Re Constructional Systems Ltd.

HCCW 960/2000

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

COMPANIES WINDING UP NO. 960 OF 2000

____________

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1. This is a petition which was first presented in October 2000, originally presented by another previous employee of the Company. However, there was then payment off of the original Petitioner and this was followed by the substitution of the original Petitioner by the present Petitioners.

2. As far as the present Petitioners are concerned, they had received various Labour Tribunal awards in February 2000 and March 2000. The total outstanding amount is in the region of about $240,000. Statutory demands had been presented.

3. This matter has been adjourned on a few occasions in January this year to enable the Company to file relevant evidence to support its proposition that it is able to repay its debts.

4. On 12 February 2001, I gave the Company leave to file a supplemental affirmation to exhibit its accounts, preferably audited accounts, but at least up-to-date management accounts, so as to consider the argument put forward by Mr Louie that the Company would be able to pay its debts soon. I would add that Mr Louie had been given leave by a Master to represent the Company on another occasion.

5. The affirmation of Mr Louie filed on 23 February 2001 does not show that the Company has a good prognosis. The management accounts for the Company which have been exhibited are only for the financial year ended 31 March 2000. They show that the Company has been sustaining a loss for the past two years and there is very little to indicate that there would be a turn in the fortunes of this Company.

6. In relation to a statement of "accounts receivable" from the Company's Taiwan subsidiary, there is a statement naming various debtors and setting out the amounts which are said to be outstanding. However, there is no evidence as to the date from which these amounts have been said to be outstanding, nor is there any indication as to the chance of these amounts being repaid to the Company within a reasonably short time.

7. On previous occasions, the Company had asked for time saying that it could pay at least half of the amount of indebtedness prior to today; however, the Company has not been able to do so.

8. In all the circumstances, especially in view of the fact that these Labour Tribunal awards had been given as long ago as February and March 2000, I would make the usual winding up order.