Chan Yee Ling Elaine v. M/S Christine M.Koo & Ip,Solicitors & Notaries

Read the full judgment text of HCLA 6/2018 on BabelCite. This HCLA judgment was delivered on 14 December 2018.

1.  Paragraph 17 of the decision should read, “… I find it important to emphasize that it is not , and ought not to be used as, a pretext for a claimant to try to put in issue all factual findings madeby a tribunal and to put them under minute scrutiny.”.

Cited by 1 case · Cites 1 case

Case No.HCLA 6/2018[2018] HKCFI 2670
Court
HCLA
Date14 Dec 2018
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCLA 6/2018

[2018] HKCFI 2670

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

LABOUR TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO 6 OF 2018

(ON APPEAL FROM LABOUR TRIBUNAL
CLAIM NO 2759 OF 2011)

______________

BETWEEN
  CHAN YEE LING ELAINE (陳綺玲) Claimant
(Applicant)
and
  M/s CHRISTINE M. KOO & IP,SOLICITORS & NOTARIES
(顧張文菊、葉成慶律師事務所)
Defendant

______________

Before: Deputy High Court Judge Keith Yeung SC in Chambers

Dates of Hearing: 20 June and 11 July 2018

Date of Decision: 14 December 2018

Date of Corrigendum: 15 January 2019

________________________

C O R R I G E N D U M

________________________


Please note the following corrigendum in the Decision dated 14 December 2018:-

1.  Paragraph 17 of the decision should read, “… I find it important to emphasize that it is not, and ought not to be used as, a pretext for a claimant to try to put in issue all factual findings madeby a tribunal and to put them under minute scrutiny.”.

Dated this the 15th January 2019

  (Vivian Fu)
  Clerk to Deputy High Court Judge Keith Yeung SC

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under HCLA 6/2018