25 Oct 2016
AROTAMAS INTERNATIONAL (HK) LTD v. MELOFIELD NURSERY AND LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR LTD
- Citation
- AROTAMAS INTERNATIONAL (HK) LTD v. MELOFIELD NURSERY AND LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR LTD
- Court
- District Court
- Case number
- DCCJ309/2015
Amendments correcting paragraphs 14 and 20 and any supplemental witness evidence strictly necessary to those corrections were allowed; the late additional maintenance costs claim was refused because it was known or should have been known earlier, the defendant gave an inadequate explanation for the delay, the amendment would require additional undisclosed evidence and discovery and would unduly disrupt the imminent trial and prejudice the plaintiff. Costs were ordered against the defendant.