|
HCCL13/2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
COMMERCIAL ACTION NO 13 OF 2011
(TRANSFERRED FROM HCA NO 961 OF 2008)
--------------------
BETWEEN
| |
廈門新景地集團有限公司
formerly known as廈門市鑫新景地房地產有限公司 |
Plaintiff |
|
and
|
| |
ETON PROPERTIES LIMITED
(裕景興業有限公司) |
1st Defendant |
| |
ETON PROPERTIEIS (HOLDINGS) LIMITED
(裕景興業(集團)有限公司) |
2nd Defendant |
| |
ETON PROPERTIEIS GROUP LIMITED
formerly known as ETON PROPERTIES (INTERNATIONAL) LIMITED |
3rd Defendant |
| |
LEGEND PROPERTIES (XIAMEN) COMPANY LIMITED (利景興業(廈門)有限公司), a limited company incorporated in Hong Kong |
4th Defendant |
| |
LEGEND PROPERTIES (XIAMEN) COMPANY LIMITED (利景興業(廈門)有限公司), a foreign‑owned enterprise incorporated in the People’s Republic of China |
5th Defendant |
| |
TAN LUCIO C (陳永栽) |
6th Defendant |
| |
CHUA DOMINGO (蔡黎明) |
7th Defendant |
| |
TAN ENG LIEN MARIANO (陳永年) |
8th Defendant |
| |
KWAN KIE YPI (關基業) |
9th Defendant |
| |
CHEUNG CHI MING (張志明) |
10th Defendant |
| |
MOK PUI HONG (莫柿杭) |
11th Defendant |
--------------------
Before: Deputy High Court Judge Stone QC in Chambers (Open to Public)
Date of Hearing: 26 October 2012
Date of Judgment : 20 November 2012
Date of Corrigenda: 5 December 2012
_________________
CORRIGENDA
_________________
1. Please note that the following corrigenda for the Judgment on Application to vary orders nisi as to costs handed down on 20 November 2012.
2. On 20 November 2012 this court handed down its judgment on, inter alia, reserved costs in this action (at paragraph 48 thereof).
3. Paragraph 48(i) deals with costs reserved by Reyes J on 21 November 2011.
4. The Order as made refers solely to the 3rd to 5th defendants, and by oversight omits reference to the 1st and 2nd defendants and the 7th to 11th defendants, which defendants also had made application for such costs.
5. This oversight was brought to the attention of the court by letters respectively from M/s Mayer Brown JSM dated 22 November 2012, and from M/s Woo Kwan Lee & Lo dated 23 November 2012.
6. Accordingly, the Order specified in terms at paragraph 48(i) of the reserved costs' judgment is to be amended to read as follows :
Order : Costs of and incidental to the plaintiff's application by summons dated 7 December 2011be to the 1st to 2nd defendants, the 3rd to 5th defendants and the 7th to 11th defendants, with certificate for two counsel for the hearing of the application on 21 December 2011, such costs to be taxed if not agreed.
7. Paragraph 48(iii) deals with costs reserved by Burrell J on 6 June 2008.
8. As currently made, the Order refers only to the 4th defendant, and by similar oversight omits reference to the 1st and 2nd defendants, which also had made application for these costs; this error also was brought to the attention of the court by the aforesaid letter dated 22 November 2012 from M/s Mayer Brown JSM.
9. Accordingly, the Order specified in terms in paragraph 48(iii) of the reserved costs' judgment is to be amended to read as follows :
Order : Costs of and incidental to the 'continuation element' of the plaintiffs' summons dated 2 June 2008, including the costs of the hearing on 6 June 2008, be to the 1st and 2nd defendants and to the 4th defendant, such costs to be taxed if not agreed.
|
(Gloria Chan)
Clerk to Deputy High Court Judge Stone |
|