HKSAR v. Yeung Sarah Sum Yee
Read the full judgment text of HCMA 576/2019 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 18 January 2021.
1. Page 7, paragraph 11, should read as “However, this does not make the evidence that they have given on what the Appellant had told them as admissible evidence as if it had come from the Appellant in the witness box. The evidence of the doctors as to what the Appellant told them, is only admissible, to explain the basis upon which the doctors had based their opinion”
Cited by 1 case
|
HCMA576/2019 [2021] HKCFI 94 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Appellate Jurisdiction) MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO HCMA576/2019 (ON APPEAL FROM ESCC1017 OF 2018) --------------------------
--------------------------
CORRIGENDUM Kindly note that the following correction in the Judgment handed down by The Honourable Madam Justice Toh on 18/01/2021： 1.Page 7, paragraph 11, should read as “However, this does not make the evidence that they have given on what the Appellant had told them as admissible evidence as if it had come from the Appellant in the witness box. The evidence of the doctors as to what the Appellant told them, is only admissible, to explain the basis upon which the doctors had based their opinion” Dated this 10th day of February 2021
|
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under HCMA 576/2019