RE WELL HARVEST HOLDINGS LTD

HCCW 390/2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

COMPANIES (WINDING-UP) NO. 390 OF 2004

____________

______________

J U D G M E N T

______________

1. This petition to wind up Well Harvest Holdings Limited ("the Company") is presented by a former employee Ng Wai Kwan.

2. The petition is based on a judgment debt of HK$105,205.40 with costs of HK$3,200.00 and interest in two awards obtained by the petitioner in the Labour Tribunal against the Company on 26 August 2003 and 4 November 2003.

3. The Company is indebted to four other employees in the total sum of HK$321,902.20 plus costs of HK$12,800.00 and interest.

4. On 25 February 2004, a demand for the debt was served on the Company. As that demand was not complied with, the petition herein was presented on 29 March 2004.

5. The petition was adjourned on several occasions in June and July 2004. On those occasions, the Company appeared by counsel and filed evidence to oppose the petition. On 27 July 2004, the solicitors have ceased to act for the Company and nobody has appeared for the Company today.

6. As to the grounds of opposition in the evidence previously filed by the Company, in short, it was contended that by an agreement made on 6 April 2003 between the Company, the petitioner and other employees, the former employees had entered into a full and final settlement of all their claims against the Company by accepting the cheques payable to them. It was further alleged that when the employees subsequently brought proceedings against the Company in the Labour Tribunal, this was in breach of the agreement to settle all claims.

7. The petitioner has filed evidence deposing that there were a total of five hearings before the Labour Tribunal from June 2003 to November 2003. Two of these hearings were attended by a representative of the Company. In one of those hearings, the Company's representative had produced to the Presiding Officer the alleged agreement for full and final settlement of the employees' claims. The allegation was rejected by the Labour Tribunal and judgment was entered against the Company.

8. At the last hearing on 5 July 2004, I gave leave to the Company to file further evidence to deal with the petitioners' evidence in reply. No further evidence has been filed by the Company.

9. In the circumstance, it does not seem to me that the Company has raised a bona fide dispute of the petitioning debt. I therefore make a winding-up order against the Company. The petitioner's costs would be paid out of the Company's assets.