Live chat Whatsapp/ Viber +6012-2273289
Skype: alexchanglaw
(Monday to Friday 0900 to 1700; Hong Kong Time GMT +8)
Debt Recovery Companies Winding Up Legal Firm

Recover Your Debts- Pay Up or Wind Up Unsecured Creditors
收复您的债款- 偿债 或 清盘无担保的债权人

Unsecured Creditors Recover Your Debts- Pay Up or Wind Up
In the recovery of your debts, we regard a winding up petition as one of the most effective methods.   The sharpest tool in the box.
无担保的债权人=收复您的债款-偿债或清盘
在收复您的债务时,我们认为清盘呈请是最有效的方式之一。道具箱里最锋利的利器。

Unsecured Creditors Get Paid Ahead of the Bankers- the Concept of Pay Up or Wind Up
Many creditors have this  idea that if we   wind up our  debtors,   the bankers will be the biggest benefactor…  The bankers will be entitled to sell all the assets and pay themselves.
无担保的债权人将会比银行家先领到钱 -偿债或清盘的概念
许多债权人认为,如果我们使得我们的债务人被清盘,证明他们是无力偿还债务,银行家们将会是最大的受益者。。。银行家们有权卖了所有财产好把钱还给他们自己。

The Remedy: Unless Order
We have to ask for a perfectly ‘timed’ Order,  just before the winding up Order is granted.   In this Order, the debtors are given an opportunity to pay the debts by a certain deadline otherwise they will be wound up by the Court.    We call this the ‘unless order’, or the ‘pay up or wind up’ order.
赔偿方法:否则指令
在清盘指令被批准前,我们必须要求一个准确的定时指令。在这种指令下,债务者们将被给予在一个期限前偿还债务的机会否者就会被法庭勒令清盘。我们称这为’否则指令’, 或“偿债或清盘”指令。

The concept of an Unless Order first entered  the Malaysian Jurisprudence in the year 2003, when Mr Alex Chang   appeared in , KTL SDN BHD V. AZRAHI HOTELS SDN BHD [2003] 3 CLJ 49 at page 51, where you can find  the following extract from the Original Judgment of Dato Vincent Ng J (as he then was):

否则指令的概念第一次出现在马来西亚司法是在2003年,张惠华大律师代表的一件案子,KTL SDN BJD V. AZRAHI HOTELS SDN BHD [2003] 3 CLJ 49,第51页,你可以找到以下拿督黄大法官的原文判决摘要

Mr. Alex Chang, who appeared for the second supporting creditor, suggested that the Respondent be given an opportunity to resolve the matter, failing which the winding up order be made. In all fairness, he suggested a later date, sometime in mid April 2002. His suggestion was enthusiastically received by Mr. Puspanathan.
张惠华先生,也就是第二债权人的代表律师向法庭建议,再给予答辩人,一次偿还债务的机会,为了公平起见,倘若答辩人仍无法在所建议的 2002 年四月中前与诉讼人达成协议并解决纠纷,该公司将被清盘。他的这项建议得到了Puspanathan 先生的认同。

The Difficulty
The  timing of the request is most crucial, if you make the suggestion too early during the hearing, the Judge may be annoyed as we as counsel (lawyers)  may not preempt (forecast)  what is on the mind of the Court.   The Court may ask us in turn, “…how could you be so sure that the Court will grant the winding up order?”
困难
做出要求的时间是最为关键的,如果您太早在聆讯中提出建议,法官可能会觉得厌烦因为身为法律顾问的我们(律师)不能预测法庭的想法。法庭可能还会转过来问我们,“。。。你怎么就这么确定法庭一定会应许清盘指令?”

On the other hand, if we ask a little too late, the winding up order would have already been granted and the Court may not change the order.
另一方面,如果我们问得太晚,清盘指令可能就已经被应许了,这么一来法庭也就不能更改指令。

What If We Did Not Ask For an Unless Order
如果我们不要求否则法令呢

If an unless order is not granted, the usual winding up order be made and in the debtor company will be wound up in the usual fashion, that is, the bankers will be paid first.  To find out more read click here What happens after compulsory winding-up?
如果否则法令不被应许,那么一般的清盘指令就会被做出然后债务公司就会以跟往常一样的方式被清盘,那就是,银行家们会先领到钱。想了解更多读点这里 强制清盘后会发生什么事?

Must I obtain a Judgment BEFORE filing a winding up petition against my debtors?
The general rule is no, to read more click here.
我是否一定要取得判决后才可以开始针对我债务人的清盘呈请?
原则上是不一定,想阅读更多点这里。

Must I obtain a Judgment BEFORE filing a winding up petition against my debtors?
我是否一定要取得判决后才可以开始针对我债务人的清盘呈请?
This is one of the most frequently asked questions.   A short answer is no.
这是其中一个最长被问到的问题。简短的答案是不。

There are however, many colleagues at law who will advise you as a matter of prudence to obtain a judgment in a civil court before presenting/ filing the Companies Winding Up Petition.
然而,很多的法律同僚都会建议你为了谨慎起见应该在民事法院那里先取得判决后才入禀开始公司清盘呈请。
Disputed Debts
有争议的债款

Generally, if there are no bona fide disputes   (disputed on substantial grounds),  a creditor need not obtain a judgment in a civil court before presenting/ filing  a companies winding up petition.
一般来讲,如果没有真正的争端(有实质根据的争议),一个债权人没必要先在民事法庭取得判决后才入禀开始公司清盘呈请

Reported Authorities

报导过的案例

These are matters handled by our Mr Alex Chang where a Companies Winding Up Petition was presented in the absence of a Judgment first had and obtained:
以下是我们张惠华大律师所处理过的在没有先取得判决情况下所进行的公司清盘呈请案件:

Campana Distributor Sdn Bhd v Amseal Engineering (M) Sdn Bhd [1998] 2 AMR 1330

Petro-Pipe Industries (M) Sdn Bhd v FW Industries Berhad [2006] 1 LNS 254

Vearrian Tanzania Ltd (Formerly known as Virian Tanzania Ltd) v CNLT (Far East) Berhad, the ground of judgment dated January 16, 2009

KTL Sdn Bhd v Azrahi Hotels Sdn Bhd [2003] 5 MLJ 503

PECD Construction Sdn Bhd v Freehold POint Sdn BHd [2008] 3 CLJ 215

NCK Wire Products Sdn Bhd v Konmark Corp Sdn Bhd [2001] 6 MLJ 57

CCM Chemicals Sdn Bhd v Urethane Technologies Sdn Bhd [2007] 3 MLJ 676

FW Industries Berhad v Suitech Sdn Bhd [2008] 3 CLJ 210

这案件随后被报道了,请查阅 KTL SDN BHD V. AZRAHI HOTELS SDN BHD [2003] CLJ 49 的案例,第51页   原审判决  Original Judgment 以上就是偿债否则被清盘  的概念…

查询更多此项服务

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Alex Chang & Co

LIVE CHAT (9am-5pm Hong Kong Time Mondays to Fridays):
Whatsapp/ Viber +6012-2273289
Secrets of Debt recovery In Malaysia!

Click Here to Find Out More...

Cart