The judgment of Linda Chan J in Re Pan Sutong [2023] HKCFI 2620 contains a review of the principles governing an appeal against the decision of an insolvency officer-holder in admitting or rejecting a proof of debt for voting purpose.

The case involved an appeal by a creditor (S) under Rule 99L of the Bankruptcy Rules against the Official Receiver’s decision, made at the first general meeting of creditors, to admit the proof of debt submitted by another creditor (B) for voting purposes.

Linda Chan J held that the court should carry out a broad and macroscopic assessment when considering an appeal under Rule 99L. It is neither necessary nor appropriate for a creditor whose debt is being challenged to adduce detailed evidence to prove how the underlying loans at each interim period had been advanced or whether they were done in accordance with the agreements. Instead, the court decides whether as at the date of the meeting, the impugned debt existed.

Her Ladyship added that an appeal under Rule 99L is a summary procedure which cannot be used for the purpose of determining the correct amount of debt owed by a particular creditor. There is no burden on B to prove the existence of the debt on a balance of probabilities. Rather, once B shows a prima facie case that the debt existed, the burden is on S to satisfy the court that its objection can be sustained.

View the full judgment here.