RE CHIU CHIT

HCB 402/2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS NO. 402 OF 2012

____________________________

____________________________

_______________

D E C I S I O N

_______________

1. This is the Bankrupt’s application to reverse the decisions of the Official Receiver (OR), acting as the trustee of her estate, in refusing to consent to the commencement of appeal by the Bankrupt in 3 actions, namely, DCCJ 4041/2007, which was an action between the Bankrupt and the Bank of China (Hong Kong) Ltd (BOC and 1^st Action), HCMP 2334/2009 (2^nd Action) and HCMP 584/2010 (3^rd Action).

2. I regret to say that this application is badly misconceived.  The 2^nd and 3^rd Actions were actually an appeal to the Court of Appeal (CA) by the Bankrupt against the refusal of the District Court for leave to appeal in the 1^st Action.  That appeal, as well as the Bankrupt’s applications to the CA and the Court of Final Appeal (CFA) for leave to appeal to the CFA, were all unsuccessful. 

3. The Bankrupt says that she is in possession of fresh evidence in support of another round of appeal.  Her numerous applications for legal aid for the intended appeal had been turned down.  Her application to the Bar Association for free legal advice was rejected on the ground that the 3 Actions had been finally disposed of. 

4. For completeness, I should mention, firstly, it was the failure by the Bankrupt to pay the costs of the BOC arising from the 3 Actions which led to her bankruptcy.  Secondly, the Bankrupt had also asked the OR for consent to commence fresh proceedings, both civil and criminal, against BOC.  That request was also declined. 

5. Quite plainly, the Bankrupt is unable to accept the adjudication by the court in the 3 Actions, and she is trying all she can to have another bite at the cherry.  In these circumstances, it is plainly right for the OR to require the Bankrupt to satisfy her of the merits of the intended actions, as well as to provide an indemnity for the OR’s costs liability which may arise from such actions, before giving any consent.  None of these requirements have been met.

6. I am unable to see any merit in this application, and the Bankrupt’s Summons dated 8 August 2016 must be dismissed. I shall hear the parties on costs.