|
HCMA 239/2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 239 OF 2010
(ON APPEAL FROM ESS 37069/2008)
____________
|
BETWEEN
|
| |
HKSAR |
Respondent |
|
and
|
| |
TANG KA HUNG |
1st Appellant |
| |
ANTHONY BUTT |
2nd Appellant |
| |
____________ |
|
Before: Hon Fung J in Court
Date of Hearing: 19 October 2010
Date of Judgment: 12 November 2010
____________________
C O R R I G E N D U M
____________________
1.Paragraph 14, page 4:-
‘Also on 4 September, Mr Butt applied before the Principal Magistrate for two witness summonses…… and one Mr Tang, the manager of the tunnel company, for the explanation of the incomplete tape.’ should be changed to ‘Also on 4 September, Mr Butt applied before the Principal Magistrate for two witness summonses…… and one Mr Wong, the manager of the tunnel company, for the explanation of the incomplete tape.’
2.Paragraph 24, page 6:-
‘Mr Tang, manager of the tunnel company…… the 1 minute delay in recording.’ should be changed to ‘Mr Wong, manager of the tunnel company…… the 1 minute delay in recording.’
3.Paragraph 44(2), page 11:-
‘It was based on evidence of defence witness notwithstanding he was is believed by the Magistrate upon cross-examination;’ should be changed to ‘It was based on evidence of defence witness notwithstanding he was disbelieved by the Magistrate upon cross-examination;’
4.Paragraph 48, page 12:-
‘The gist of Miss Ching’s argument was that……Mr Tang’s witness statement, and the unavailability of the alleged clip seen by Mr Yeung on YouTube.’ should be changed to ‘The gist of Miss Ching’s argument was that……Mr Wong’s witness statement, and the unavailability of the alleged clip seen by Mr Yeung on YouTube.’
5.Paragraph 52, page 13:-
‘That said, I do not consider that Mr Butt, having acted on instructions from the 1st Appellant, was guilty was serious improper act or serious misconduct, as to which, he personally rather than the 1st Appellant should be responsible for the costs.’ should be changed to ‘That said, I do not consider that Mr Butt, having acted on instructions from the 1st Appellant, was guilty of serious improper act or serious misconduct, as to which, he personally rather than the 1st Appellant should be responsible for the costs.’
Dated the 1st day of December 2010.
| |
K. Lam
Clerk to Hon. Fung, J |
|