BabelCite

Miah, Mohammed Tara v. Hyundai-ccecc Joint Venture

Read the full judgment text of DCEC 1068/2005 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment.

50. Since Order 22 of the RDC fills in the gap left by brevity of rule 20 of the ECR, I agree with Mr Tsui that acceptance of payment into court in employees’ compensation proceedings after the statutory period of 14 days will normally have costs consequences for the applicant in respect of the post -payment in period.

Case No.DCEC 1068/2005
Court
District Court
Date—
Judge—
Case Document
100%Judiciary

DCEC1068/2005

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION CASE NO. 1068 OF 2005

____________

BETWEEN

　 MIAH, MOHAMMED TARA Applicant
　 and 　
　 HYUNDAI-CCECC JOINT VENTURE Respondent

____________

Before: Her Honour District Judge Marlene Ng in Court.

Date of Hearing: 8th May, 2006.

Date of Handing Down Judgment: 22nd May, 2006

_______________

CORRIGENDUM

_______________

Paragraph 50 on page 14 of the Judgment should read:

50. Since Order 22 of the RDC fills in the gap left by brevity of rule 20 of the ECR, I agree with Mr Tsui that acceptance of payment into court in employees’ compensation proceedings after the statutory period of 14 days will normally have costs consequences for the applicant in respect of the post-payment in period.

Dated this 25th day of May, 2006

　 (Tony Ho) (Mr.)
Clerk to Her Honour District Judge Marlene Ng

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under DCEC 1068/2005

Miah, Mohammed Tara v. Hyundai-ccecc Joint Venture
District Court—