Cinatic Technology Ltd v. Heykas Technology Co. Ltd and Another

Read the full judgment text of DCCJ 5874/2019 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment was delivered on 18 June 2020.

1.  Page 14, 3 rd line should read as “Miss Natalie So and Mr Frederick Hui (Solicitor Advocate), instructed by Zhong Lun Law Firm, for the 2 nd defendant”.

Cited by 1 case · Cites 1 case

Case No.DCCJ 5874/2019[2020] HKDC 519
Court
District Court
Date18 Jun 2020
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

DCCJ 5874/2019

[2020] HKDC 519

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CIVIL ACTION NO 5874 OF 2019

--------------------

BETWEEN    
  CINATIC TECHNOLOGY LIMITED Plaintiff

and

  HEYKAS TECHNOLOGY CO. LIMITED 1st defendant
  PT. TPR SALES INDONESIA 2nd defendant
  HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LIMITED Respondent

--------------------

Before: His Honour Judge Andrew Li in Chambers (Open to public)

Date of Hearing: 18 June 2020

Date of Decision: 18 June 2020

Date of handing down Reasons for Decision: 9 July 2020

CORRIGENDUM

Notice is hereby given that the following amendment be made to the Reasons for Decision:

1.  Page 14, 3rd line should read as “Miss Natalie So and Mr Frederick Hui (Solicitor Advocate), instructed by Zhong Lun Law Firm, for the 2nd defendant”.

Dated the 15th day of July 2020

( Andrew SY Li )
District Judge

Miss Agnes Kwong, instructed by Messrs Huen & Partners, for the plaintiff

The 1st defendant acting in person being absent and did not attend the hearing

Miss Natalie So and Mr Frederick Hui (Solicitor Advocate), instructed by Zhong Lun Law Firm, for the 2nd defendant

Mr Peter So of Messrs Deacons for the respondent

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under DCCJ 5874/2019