HKSAR v. Best Pencil (Hong Kong) Limited and Others
Read the full judgment text of DCCC 265/2022 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment was delivered on 29 August 2024.
1. Paragraph 223, line 3 “…who had not participated in…” should read “…who had participated in…”
Cites 2 cases
|
[English Translation - 英譯本] DCCC 265/2022 [2024] HKDC 1430 IN THE DISTRICTCOURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION DISTRICT COURT CRIMINAL CASE NO. 265 OF 2022 ____________________
___________________
____________________ CORRIGENDUM ____________________ Please note the following corrigenda in the Reasons for Verdict handed down on 29 August 2024:” 1.Paragraph 223, line 3 “…who had not participated in…” should read “…who had participated in…” 2.Paragraph 245, line 5 in Chinese「高達95%或以上的受訪示威者獲過……」should read 「高達95%或以上的受訪示威者透過……」[1] 3.Paragraph 288, line 7 “local” should read “vocal” 4.Paragraph 333, line 4 “…the Central People’s Republic of China…” should read “…the People’s Republic of China…” 5.Paragraph 442, line 5 in Chinese「蔡東毫」should read「蔡東豪」[2] 6.Paragraph 460, line 3 in Chinese「它當然不是個別的警員無需負責」should read 「它當然不是說個別的警員無需負責」[3] 7.Paragraph 461, line 13 “…(see paragraph 212)…”should read “…(see paragraph 221)…” Dated the 6th day of September 2024
[1] Translator’s note: this amendment does not affect the English version [2] - ditto - [3] - ditto - |
Cases cited in this judgment
Further hearings and rulings under DCCC 265/2022