东方泰隆建筑装饰工程有限公司.docVIP

  1. 1、原创力文档(book118)网站文档一经付费(服务费),不意味着购买了该文档的版权,仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用,不得用于商业用途,未经授权,严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等,侵权必究。。
  2. 2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传,本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺!文档内容仅供研究参考,付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费,意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险,本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务;查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档,您可以点击 这里二次下载
  3. 3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等,请点击“版权申诉”(推荐),也可以打举报电话:400-050-0827(电话支持时间:9:00-18:30)。
  4. 4、该文档为VIP文档,如果想要下载,成为VIP会员后,下载免费。
  5. 5、成为VIP后,下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后,不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们
  6. 6、成为VIP后,您将拥有八大权益,权益包括:VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
  7. 7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传,每下载1次, 网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等,对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档
查看更多
东方泰隆建筑装饰工程有限公司

HCA105/2004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE ACTION NO. 105 OF 2004 --------------------- BETWEEN CHIU TIN YAU LESLEY Plaintiff and DICKSON NG (also known as NG KWOK CHING Defendant also known as NG KWOK CHING DICKSON and also known as DICKSON NG KWOK CHING) ----------------------- Before?: Hon Poon J in Court Date of Hearing?: 10 November 2009 Date of Judgment? 10 November f2009 Date of Reasons for Judgment : 13 November 2009 -------------------------------------------------------- R E A S O N S F O R J U D G M E N T --------------------------------------------------------- On 10燦ovember 2009, I allowed the plaintiff-’s claim and entered judgment in his favour against the defendant for HK$2.5爉illion with interest at -judgment rate from the date of writ to payment. I燼lso ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff costs of -the action, including all costs reserved, to be taxed if not agreed. These are my reasons. The dispute The plaintiff is a businessman. He was one of the proprietors of 東方泰隆建築裝飾工程有限公司 (“the Company”) and a director of Wing Fung Cheung Company Limited (“WFC”). The defendant is also a businessman. It is the plaintiff’s case that he came to know the defendant through the introduction of a close friend. The present action arose out of a sum of HK$2.5爉illion that the plaintiff paid the defendant on 29燗pril 2002 (nt“the Sum”). The plaintiff’s pleaded case is that pursuant to an oral agreement between the parties (“the Oral Agreement”), he paid the Sum to the defendant as the deposit in the form of a performance bond for the decoration work of a building construction project in a housing development known as 中國北京蝶翠華庭 in Beijing (“the Decoration Project”). The Project however did not materialize. The consideration for the Sum had therefore totally failed. Despite repeated requests, the defendant had failed to repay him. The defendant’s pleaded case is that the Decoration

文档评论(0)

ligennv1314 + 关注
实名认证
文档贡献者

该用户很懒,什么也没介绍

1亿VIP精品文档

相关文档