C.A. Pacific Finance Ltd v. Sin Mei Chun Nadia
Read the full judgment text of HCA 838/1998 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 23 February 2006.
1. Heading, page 5: ‘ The plaintiff’s case for dismissal/striking out’ should be read as ‘ The defendant’s case for dismissal/striking out’
|
HCA838/1998 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE ACTION NO.838 OF 1998 ---------------------- BETWEEN
----------------------- Before : Deputy High Court Judge Muttrie in Chambers Date of Hearing : 18 February 2006 Date of Judgment : 23 February 2006 --------------------------------- C O R R I G E N D U M --------------------------------- 1. Heading, page 5: ‘The plaintiff’s case for dismissal/striking out’ should be read as ‘The defendant’s case for dismissal/striking out’ 2. Paragraph 10, Page 5: ‘ The plaintiff’s primary case is prejudice arising from the delay.’ should be read as ‘ The defendant’s primary case is prejudice arising from the delay.’ 3. Paragraph 12, Page 5, ‘ The plaintiff’s secondary case is based on mutual dealings.’ should be read as ‘ The defendant’s secondary case is based on mutual dealings.’ Dated the 28th day of March 2006
|
Further hearings and rulings under HCA 838/1998