Lkw v. Ky

CACV 182/2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 182 OF 2015

(ON APPEAL FROM FCMC 530 OF 2011)

_______________

_______________

Before: Hon Lam VP, Cheung and Chu JJA in Court

Date of hearing and judgment: 13 April 2016

Date of Reasons for Judgment: 30 August 2017

_______________

CORRIGENDUM

_______________

1.On page 4, in paragraph 8(6), at the 5^th line, the part of the sentence after the semi-colon should read:

“and the court is entitled to draw adverse inference that the petitioner was the beneficial owner of the two properties (Judgment §§79 and 89).”

2.On page 11, in paragraph 25, the 2^nd sentence should read:

“Her evidence in this regard was accepted by the Judge, including her evidence that the four delivery notes were found from the Fumin Property stapled together in a bundle.”

3.On page 12, in paragraph 29, at the 9^th line, the sentence should read:

“As the Judge had observed, had it not been the case, the petitioner would not have to conceal from the respondent his interest in the Properties.”

4.On page 14, in paragraph 32, the last sentence should read:

“Practitioners in particular should bear in mind that failure to observe the Practice Direction could result in costs sanction, including an order disallowing them the costs for preparing the bundles not only inter partes but also between solicitors and clients.”

Dated this 2^nd day of November 2017