HKGalden時事臺
發表文章發起投票
膠登依家係咪講東方食屎狗唔再撚驚?
賣xx起家?

直接打驚唔驚?
Good0Bad0
2013/06/20, 8:06:34 早上
本貼文共有 28 個回覆
此貼文已鎖,將不接受回覆
敵人千百手段,就算你全體自律,佢搵打手一樣可以整個局出黎,

對於無限資金既敵人,仲有咩奇計可以應付?

寫定免責囉

高登無免責咩??)
#212013/06/20, 9:02:11 上午
引用快速引用
敵人千百手段,就算你全體自律,佢搵打手一樣可以整個局出黎,

對於無限資金既敵人,仲有咩奇計可以應付?

寫定免責囉

高登無免責咩??)

你開AC既時候會員守則係冇免責
#222013/06/20, 9:03:40 上午
引用快速引用
敵人千百手段,就算你全體自律,佢搵打手一樣可以整個局出黎,

對於無限資金既敵人,仲有咩奇計可以應付?

印象中唔係東方定法庭話
只要可以做到見到有果啲誹謗字眼就del 唔好好似高登咁拖返幾個月甚至幾年咁
就無問題咩

5. The defendant had been informed by the plaintiffs of the presence of the defamatory words in or about mid-December 2008 but had not ensured their removal until August 2009, a delay of some eight months. No good reason was advanced for the delay. It was that act of negligence which founded liability.
http://legalref.judiciary.gov.hk/lrs/common/search/search_result_detail_frame.jsp?DIS=79879&QS;=+&TP=JU

條link唔work
#232013/06/20, 9:04:49 上午
引用快速引用
敵人千百手段,就算你全體自律,佢搵打手一樣可以整個局出黎,

對於無限資金既敵人,仲有咩奇計可以應付?

寫定免責囉

高登無免責咩??)

你開AC既時候會員守則係冇免責

寫左免責係咪完全免責我就唔知

但法官係咬住,高登討論區有權去修改/刪除會員留言,而討論區又比會員發言算係發佈者
#242013/06/20, 9:06:57 上午
引用快速引用
東方人喜愛吃白色的河粉
#252013/06/20, 9:08:01 上午
引用快速引用
敵人千百手段,就算你全體自律,佢搵打手一樣可以整個局出黎,

對於無限資金既敵人,仲有咩奇計可以應付?

印象中唔係東方定法庭話
只要可以做到見到有果啲誹謗字眼就del 唔好好似高登咁拖返幾個月甚至幾年咁
就無問題咩

5. The defendant had been informed by the plaintiffs of the presence of the defamatory words in or about mid-December 2008 but had not ensured their removal until August 2009, a delay of some eight months. No good reason was advanced for the delay. It was that act of negligence which founded liability.
http://legalref.judiciary.gov.hk/lrs/common/search/search_result_detail_frame.jsp?DIS=79879&QS;=+&TP=JU

條link唔work

http://tinyurl.com/pwlud8v
#262013/06/20, 9:09:46 上午
引用快速引用
唔鼓勵玩...
#272013/06/20, 9:11:59 上午
引用快速引用
敵人千百手段,就算你全體自律,佢搵打手一樣可以整個局出黎,

對於無限資金既敵人,仲有咩奇計可以應付?

印象中唔係東方定法庭話
只要可以做到見到有果啲誹謗字眼就del 唔好好似高登咁拖返幾個月甚至幾年咁
就無問題咩

5. The defendant had been informed by the plaintiffs of the presence of the defamatory words in or about mid-December 2008 but had not ensured their removal until August 2009, a delay of some eight months. No good reason was advanced for the delay. It was that act of negligence which founded liability.
http://legalref.judiciary.gov.hk/lrs/common/search/search_result_detail_frame.jsp?DIS=79879&QS;=+&TP=JU

條link唔work

http://tinyurl.com/pwlud8v

讀得書少,,,完全睇唔明
#282013/06/20, 9:18:13 上午
引用快速引用
上一頁
發表文章發起投票