P v. M

Read the full judgment text of HCCT 6/2019 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 24 July 2019 before Hon Coleman J.

Arbitration proceedings arising under the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 609) in HCCT 6/2019 before Hon Coleman J in the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance, Construction and Arbitration Proceedings. The judgment dated 24 July 2019 was subject to a corrigendum issued on 14 August 2019 addressing typographical and wording errors in various parts of the original judgment text. The corrigendum clarified corrections relating to wording such as "findings of", "of irrelevance", and proper spelling of "Ordinance". No legal issues were determined or outcome orders recorded in the corrigendum. The judgment concerns arbitration procedural matters within the scope of Cap 609. The parties involved are P (Plaintiff and Respondent in the Arbitration) and M (Defendant and Claimant in the Arbitration).

Cited by 1 case · Cites 1 case

Case No.HCCT 6/2019[2019] HKCFI 1864
Court
高等法院原訟法庭
Date24 Jul 2019
JudgeHon Coleman J
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCCT 6/2019

[2019] HKCFI 1864

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTRUCTION AND ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS

NO. 6 OF 2019

______________

  IN THE MATTER of the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 609)
  and
  IN THE MATTER of an Arbitration

______________

BETWEEN    
  P Plaintiff
(Respondent in the Arbitration)
  and  
  M Defendant
(Claimant in the Arbitration)

______________

Before: Hon Coleman J in Chambers

Dates of Hearing: 24 July 2019

Date of Decision: 24 July 2019

Date of Corrigendum: 14 August 2019


__________________________

C O R R I G E N D U M

__________________________

Please note the following corrigendum in the Judgment dated 24 July 2019:-

1.  At page 17 between line L and M, the words, “find it is in”, should read as “findings of”;

2.  At page 19 between line S and T, the words, “irrelevant”, should read as “of irrelevance”;

3.  At page 19 between line S and T, the words, “and”, should read as “and for”;

4.  At page 21 between line I and J, the words, “Ordnance”, should read as “Ordinance”;

5.  At page 22 between line N and O, the words, “be”, should read as “being”;

6.  At page 22 between line P and Q, the words, “and”, should read as “an”;

7.  At page 26 between line S and T, the words, “held”, should read as “held to”; and

8.  At page 27 between line K and L, the words, “introduced that”, should read as “was adduced in”.

Dated the 14th day of August 2019

  (Alvin Kwok)
  for Registrar, High Court

Cited by 1 case

Other judgments that cite this case

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under HCCT 6/2019