Tang Kun Nin, Tony Manager of Hung Shing Temple v. Cheng Wai Fong and Others

HCA 87/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO 87 OF 2011

________________________

Coram: Deputy High Court Judge Marlene Ng in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 10 December 2013

Date of Handing Down Decision: 12 March 2014

________________________

CORRIGENDUM

________________________

1.  Please note the following corrections in respect of the Decision of the above case given by Deputy High Court Judge Marlene Ng on 12 March 2014:-

(1) All reference to “D’s” should be amended to read as “Ds” wherever the former occurs.

(2) Paragraph 98 on page 49 is amended as follows: “…… and Tan Chuk Hang Yeuk are were t’ongs within the meaning of sections 15-16 of the NTO, ……”.

(3) Paragraph 99 on page 49 is amended as follows: “The plaintiff exhibited a revised draft of the Amended Reply and Defence to Counterclaim (“2nd Reply Draft”) and a revised draft of the Amended FBP Answers (“2^nd FBP Draft”) to the Kwong 3^rd Aff. In the 2^nd Reply Draft, the plaintiff …… and On Leung Yuek Yeuk, …… or otherwise authorised, consent to and approved the present action. In the 2^nd FBP Draft, the plaintiff averred that the Temple, On Leung Yeuk, Tang Wing Shing Tong, Hung Shing Kung and Tang Chuk Hang Yeuk were and still are t'ongs within the meaning of sections 15-16 of the NTO.”

(4) Paragraph 100 on page 50 is amended as follows: “…… D2 and D3 had no futher objection to the 2^nd Reply Draft and the 2^nd FBP Draft. …… to bring it into line with the amendments proposed in the 2^nd Reply Draft and the 2^nd FBP Draft, ……”.

(5) Paragraph 101(c) on page 50 is amended as follows: “…… in line with the proposed amendments in the Writ Draft, the 2^nd Reply Draft and the 2^nd FBP Draft,”.

(6) Paragraph 101(f) on page 50 is amended as follows: “…… in the manner marked in red as per the 2^nd FBP Draft,”.

Dated 25 March 2014