 [2025] HKCFI 3351, Linda Chan J provided guidance on winding-up petitions founded on judgment debts, especially those arising from default judgments.

The petitioning debt arose from a default judgment entered after the Company failed to file a defence within the time set by an unless order. Afterward, the Company tried – and failed – to set aside the default judgment. Citing 

(CACV 87/2012, 8 May 2013), the Company invited the Court to “go behind” the judgment on the basis that an appeal was pending and that it had a 

The Court rejected this argument. At §36 of the judgment, Linda Chan J helpfully synthesised the principles from 

 and underscored the need for a proper understanding of the Court of Appeal’s holdings. Importantly, if the judgment debtor has already failed in its application to set aside the judgment or its appeal on substantive grounds, it is most unlikely that the Court will find that the judgment debtor could rebut the 

evidence of indebtedness – unless the debtor can show grounds such as fraud, collusion, or miscarriage of justice in the prior proceedings.

Crucially, the Court affirmed that a default judgment, on its own, does not justify going behind the judgment. The Companies Court is entitled to consider the debtor’s failure to defend and treat any late challenges as attempts to delay the process.

, instructed by DLA Piper Hong Kong, for the Petitioner.

Members

Recruitment

Mentions

More on Recent Judgments

No Second Bite: Judgment Debts in Winding-up Proceedings

About

Members

Recruitment

What's New