Read the full judgment text of HCA 1113/2017 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 30 January 2018.
1. The 2 nd defendant is a law firm in Hong Kong. The 3 rd defendant, a practising solicitor in Hong Kong, is a partner of the 2 nd defendant. Before me was their application to strike out the plaintiff’s claim against them on the sole ground that the plaintiff’s claim is a claim for reflective loss not permitted in law, and thus discloses no reasonable cause of action. At the end of the hearing, I allowed their application, and ordered that the plaintiff’s Statement of Claim against the 2 nd
Cited by 2 cases · Cites 2 cases