HCMA672/2004 HKSAR v. CHINA STATE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING (HONG KONG) LTD - LawHero
HCMA672/2004
高等法院（裁判法院上訴）Deputy High Court Judge E Toh13/3/2005
HCMA672/2004
由此
A A
B HCMA 672/2004 B
C IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE C
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
D D
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
E MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 672 OF 2004 E
(ON APPEAL FROM TWS 19557/2003)
F F
____________
G G
BETWEEN
H HKSAR (香港特別行政區政府) Respondent H
I and I
J CHINA STATE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING J
(HONG KONG) LIMITED
K （中國建築工程（香港）有限公司） Appellant K
L
____________
L
M Before: Deputy High Court Judge E Toh in Court M
Date of Hearing: 10 and 12 November 2004
N N
Date of Judgment: 14 March 2005
O O
CORRIGENDA
P P
Kindly note the following correction in the Judgment of the above
Q Q
mentioned case delivered by Deputy High Court Judge E Toh on 14 March
R 2005 ;
R
1. In line P of paragraph 13 on page 5, the first word –
S
“Constructor” should be replaced by the word – S
T “Contractor”. T
U U
V V
由此
A -2- A
B B
2. In the first line of paragraph 14 on page 6, “…the
C Appellant was complying” should be replaced by “…the C
Appellant though complying”.
D D
3. In the second line of paragraph 20 on page 7, “…Appellant
E company had not showed…” should be replaced by E
“…Appellant company had not shown…”.
F F
G Dated the 16th March, 2005 G
H H
E Lau (Miss)
I Clerk to DHCJ E Toh I
J J
K K
L L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
HKSAR v. CHINA STATE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING (HONG KONG) LTD
由此
A A
B HCMA 672/2004 B
C IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE C
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
D D
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
E MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 672 OF 2004 E
(ON APPEAL FROM TWS 19557/2003)
F F
____________
G G
BETWEEN
H HKSAR (香港特別行政區政府) Respondent H
I and I
J CHINA STATE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING J
(HONG KONG) LIMITED
K （中國建築工程（香港）有限公司） Appellant K
L
____________
L
M Before: Deputy High Court Judge E Toh in Court M
Date of Hearing: 10 and 12 November 2004
N N
Date of Judgment: 14 March 2005
O O
CORRIGENDA
P P
Kindly note the following correction in the Judgment of the above
Q Q
mentioned case delivered by Deputy High Court Judge E Toh on 14 March
R 2005 ;
R
1. In line P of paragraph 13 on page 5, the first word –
S
“Constructor” should be replaced by the word – S
T “Contractor”. T
U U
V V
由此
A -2- A
B B
2. In the first line of paragraph 14 on page 6, “…the
C Appellant was complying” should be replaced by “…the C
Appellant though complying”.
D D
3. In the second line of paragraph 20 on page 7, “…Appellant
E company had not showed…” should be replaced by E
“…Appellant company had not shown…”.
F F
G Dated the 16th March, 2005 G
H H
E Lau (Miss)
I Clerk to DHCJ E Toh I
J J
K K
L L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V