中紀投資有限公司 v. 青山道國際工業大廈業主立案法團
Read the full judgment text of CACV 96/2021 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 18 November 2021.
1. In paragraph 9.5 at page 5 line Q to page 6 line B,
Cited by 2 cases · Cites 1 case
|
CACV 96/2021 [2021] HKCA 1737 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO 96 OF 2021 (ON APPEAL FROM LDBM NO 118 OF 2017) ________________________
________________________
________________________ CORRIGENDUM ________________________
1.In paragraph 9.5 at page 5 line Q to page 6 line B,
Dated this 7th day of December, 2021
9a According to the PO’s review decision (para. 35), “it is not in dispute that the Pre-Window Frames and the Post-Window Frames are in fact the same structures. The difference between the Pre-Window Frames and the Post-Window Frames is very technical, in that it is unknown as to how the Pre-Window Frames were affixed whilst the Post-Window Frames were affixed by Tiff as prescribed registered contractor under the minor works scheme in March 2018”. |
Cases cited in this judgment
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under CACV 96/2021