Pang Lai Yin v. The Law Society of Hong Kong

Read the full judgment text of HCMP 1719/2010 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 2 November 2010.

1. At page 3 of paragraph 7 line 6, it should read “it is surprising that Mr Pang’s traineeship was only terminated after Mr Pang had in writing declined an offer to continue working for Mr Chan after qualification.”

Cites 1 case

Case No.HCMP 1719/2010
Court
High Court CFI
Date02 Nov 2010
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCMP 1719/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 1719 OF 2010

______________

  IN THE MATTER of an application by Trainee Solicitor PANG LAI YIN (彭勵然), on compliance with Section 4(1)(a) of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance (Cap. 159) and Rule 3(2)(b) of the Admission and Registration Rules (Cap. 158B, sub leg)
  and
  IN THE MATTER of an application to the Chief Judge for exemption from submitting Form 4 by virtue of Rule 13 of the Admission and Registration Rules (Cap. 159B, sub leg) and pursuant to Order 106 Rule 5 of the Rules of the High Court (Cap. 4A)

______________

BETWEEN

PANG LAI YIN (彭勵然) Applicant
and
THE LAW SOCIETY OF HONG KONG Respondent

______________

Before: Hon Tang Ag CJHC in Court (Sitting as an additional Judge of the Court of First Instance)

Date of Hearing: 2 November 2010

Date of Decision: 2 November 2010

Date of Reasons for Decision: 16 November 2010

Date of Corrigendum: 18 November 2010

______________

CORRIGENDUM

______________

1.At page 3 of paragraph 7 line 6, it should read “it is surprising that Mr Pang’s traineeship was only terminated after Mr Pang had in writing declined an offer to continue working for Mr Chan after qualification.”

2.At the end of page 5, the second last line should read “Mr. Ricky S. P. Ng for the Law Society of Hong Kong”

Ingrid Lam (Miss)
Clerk to Ag Chief Judge, High Court