Trenus Oceanway Ltd v. Richland International Ltd and Another
Read the full judgment text of HCCW 352/2014 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 1 February 2021.
1. In paragraph 9, line G to H, “In addition the 1 st Respondent indicated that it wished…” should read “In addition the Petitioner indicated that it wished…”.
Cited by 1 case · Cites 1 case
|
HCCW 352/2014 [2021] HKCFI 243 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE COMPANIES WINDING-UP PROCEEDINGS NO 352 OF 2014 ________________
________________
________________ Before: Hon Harris J in Chambers Date of Hearing: 11 January 2021 Date of Decision: 1 February 2021 Date of Corrigendum: 2 February 2021 ____________________ C O R R I G E N D U M ____________________ 1. In paragraph 9, line G to H, “In addition the 1st Respondent indicated that it wished…” should read “In addition the Petitioner indicated that it wished…”. Dated the 2nd day of February 2020.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
Cases cited in this judgment
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under HCCW 352/2014