23 Apr 2007
GOLD DRAGON LTD v. POON LAI BING
- Citation
- GOLD DRAGON LTD v. POON LAI BING
- Court
- District Court
- Case number
- DCCJ2299/2006
The plaintiff was not estopped because consenting to an application to amend a defendant's pleading is not an election of mutually exclusive causes of action when the plaintiff was passive to the defendant's application; the impugned paragraphs (other than paragraph 15) were vague and lacked necessary particulars as to fraud, forgery and dishonesty and therefore must be struck out; costs were apportioned — plaintiff to bear costs of the first day adjournment and otherwise recover 80% of the costs of the application, with taxation and certificate for counsel as ordered.