Calcutta HC Disqualifies Politician Mukul Roy from Assembly under Anti-Defection Law  ||  Supreme Court Bans Mining in and Around National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries  ||  Supreme Court Terms Delay in Framing Charges for 4 Years in Maharashtra Case ‘Shocking’  ||  Kerala High Court: Widow’s Remarriage No Bar to Compassionate Appointment  ||  Delhi HC: Child Care Leave Not Absolute but Cannot Be Denied Arbitrarily  ||  Bombay HC: Furnace Oil Not Part of ‘Plant & Machinery’, No Complete Sales Tax Set-Off  ||  MP HC: Injury Not Required to Prove Attempt to Murder  ||  Supreme Court: Tenant Must Pay Rent Despite Appeal Against Fixation Order Without Stay  ||  Supreme Court: Counterclaim under Order 8 Rule 6A CPC Allowed Only Against Plaintiff  ||  SC: Externally Procured Parts Given For Assembly, Not Used in Manufacture, Not Liable to Excise Duty    

Kam Leung Sui Kwan and ors v. Kam Kwan Lai and ors - (11 Nov 2015)

Location of conduct of business of company quintessential to jurisdiction

Company

Hearing a petition against the prejudicial conduct of business by a stakeholder in the company, the Hong Kong High Court gave rather a long stretch to “just and equitable”. Yung Kee Holdings Limited, holding company for a restaurant business, was incorporated in the British Virgin Islands in 1994, however, all board meetings were held in Hong Kong and all administrative matters were discussed in the city. The Court relied on previous rulings to move purposefully from finding injustice in the manner in which the company had been commandeered by the Respondent after the Petitioner’s death, to finding its own jurisdiction in the matter. It concluded that not only did all parties reside in Hong Kong, complaint conduct took place in Hong Kong and the whole of business income was derived from Hong Kong, giving courts sufficient jurisdiction to invoke winding-up.

Tags : JURISDICTION   LOCATION   CONDUCT OF BUSINESS   INCORPORATION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved