Rich Lucky Properties Development Ltd v. Siu Ping Siu and Another
Read the full judgment text of HCA 618/2011 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 29 February 2012.
1. I am not satisfied that there is justification to adduce the new evidence which the plaintiff seeks to rely on. The plaintiff has not explained why the new evidence sought to be introduced could not, with reasonable diligence, have been adduced at the initial hearing before me.
Cited by 2 cases
|
HCA 618/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE HIGH COURT ACTION NO 618 OF 2011 ------------------------
Before : Deputy High Court Judge M Chan in Chambers Date of Hearing : 29 February 2012 Date of Decision : 29 February 2012 ------------------------- D E C I S I O N -------------------------- 1.I am not satisfied that there is justification to adduce the new evidence which the plaintiff seeks to rely on. The plaintiff has not explained why the new evidence sought to be introduced could not, with reasonable diligence, have been adduced at the initial hearing before me. 2.I am not satisfied, after hearing the parties, that there are any reasonable prospects of success on this appeal. So the application for leave is dismissed, with costs. (Submissions on costs) 3.Costs are assessed at $58,000 to be payable forthwith.
Miss Annie Lai, instructed by Martin Law & Co, for the plaintiff Mr Benjamin Chain, instructed by Bobby Tse & Co, for the 1st and 2nd defendants | ||||||||||||||||||||
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under HCA 618/2011