No results.

InsightsCase Highlights

Re Lucky Resources

11 Jul 2016

In the recent decision of Re Lucky Resources (HK) Ltd [2016] 4 HKLRD 301, a petitioner applied to wind-up a Hong Kong company on the strength of an arbitration award, without first applying for leave to enforce the award under s.84 of the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap.609). Can this be done?

Harris J emphasised the well-established proposition that the presentation of a winding‑up petition does not constitute enforcement of an award. The company was accordingly wound up.

In so deciding, Harris J applied a number of local and Commonwealth decisions, including In Re Grand China Logistics Holding (Group) Co., Ltd (HCCW 130/2013, 19 August 2013) and Re Grande Holdings Ltd [2013] 4 HKLRD 353. These cases demonstrate that a winding-up action does not amount to “enforcement” of a judgment or a Hong Kong arbitration award. Accordingly, the leave requirement under s.84 of the Arbitration Ordinance does not apply.

The decision of Re Lucky Resources (HK) Ltd made this legal point absolutely clear, much to the benefit of insolvency practitioners in Hong Kong.

Please click here to read the full judgment


José-Antonio Maurellet SC and Tom Ng appeared for the petitioner in this case.