法律图书馆>>法律论文资料库>>全文
香港法院审理案件中的法律论证过程 ——以United Phosphorus LTD v. China Merchants Shipping & Enterprises Co Ltd 上诉审为例/陈汉瑛(22)
In short, one-stop adjudication would be a dead letter if the two sets of proceedings could not be consolidated and tried together by the same judge.
Conclusion
At the end of the day, the judge was, as I have said, exercising a value judgment, weighing up a whole variety of different factors. I have spelt out those factors so that I could more easily assess whether the value judgment which the judge made was one which could fairly be characterised as outside the generous ambit within which reasonable disagreement is possible. I recognise that on the same material another judge may have come to a different conclusion. But not without some hesitation, I have concluded that the conclusion which Stone J reached was one which did not fall outside the generous ambit within which reasonable disagreement is possible. I would therefore dismiss the appeal. At present, I see no reason why costs should not follow the event, and the order nisi which I would make is that the Defendant should pay to the Plaintiff its costs of the appeal, to be taxed if not agreed.


总共23页     [1]   [2]   [3]   [4]   [5]   [6]   [7]   [8]   [9]   [10]   [11]   [12]   [13]   [14]   [15]   [16]   [17]   [18]   [19]   [20]   [21]   22   [23]  
上一页     下一页    

声明:本论文由《法律图书馆》网站收藏,
仅供学术研究参考使用,
版权为原作者所有,未经作者同意,不得转载。
法律图书馆>>法律论文资料库