MOORTHY SELVARAJ v. KARUPAYEE AMMEL (as the administratrix of the estate of KARUPAYA SELVARAJ, deceased) AND OTHERS

HCCW 416/2019

[2021] HKCFI 2974

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

COMPANIES WINDING-UP PROCEEDINGS NO 416 OF 2019

________________

________________

________________

__________________

D E C I S I O N

__________________

1.  The petition will be listed for dismissal next Monday, 4 October 2021. So far as the costs are concerned, I will make the following order that the 1^st to 4^th Respondents pay the Petitioner’s costs of the proceedings up to and including 3 November 2020, thereafter, there be no order as to costs.

2.  My reasons are quite simple.  It would appear clear that the proceedings were commenced with a view to seeking a winding up of the Company.  The Petitioner at the time the petition was presented would not have been in a position to initiate a voluntary winding up process holding only 10% of the Company’s shares.

3.  Once the Company had been put into voluntary winding up, the only issue would appear to have been the identity of the Liquidators. Whilst it is correct that the Petitioner seems to have eventually ended up with Liquidators he was satisfied would bring the degree of independence and thoroughness to the supervision of the liquidation that he wanted, it seems to me that the costs and complexity of the continuation of the winding up proceedings beyond November 2021, involved disproportionate work and costs given the availability to the Petitioner of an alternative route for challenging the initial Appointees as Liquidators.  For that reason after November 2020 I consider that the appropriate order is no order as to costs.

4.  So far as the costs of this hearing are concerned, it seems to me that the order that is consistent with my decision on the substantive costs dispute is no order as to costs save that the Company’s costs should be paid out of the assets of the Company.