20 Jan 2000
COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v. POINTSTYLE INVESTMENT LTD. AND OTHERS
- Citation
- COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v. POINTSTYLE INVESTMENT LTD. AND OTHERS
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCA13008/1996
Para.34 did not amount to a clear and unambiguous admission because the Amended Defence, read as a whole, disclosed a primary defence inconsistent with such an admission; therefore the Master's order entering judgment on admission against D2 and D3 was set aside and the plaintiff's application dismissed to that extent.