CO129-622-6 Claims of War Supplies to Eastern Group Supply Council 21-1-1949 - 23-12-1949 — Page 63

62

16/47.

m

suggested that you should refuse to meet

all claims within this category. I added

that there would be no objection to the

claimants lodging .claims for loss or

damage to the Hong Kong War Damage Claims

Commission, You recommended however,

in your despatch No. 281 of the 29th November

that there should be no ar Damage

(1)

(2) 55178/21A/47

(6) 54126/6/48

18895/17/48

(7/4)

626/477

(16)

M

18895117147

(14/47) (14) m 18895/1714)

Compensation Scheme in Hong Kong, a

Felegram

1947

recommendation which I accepted in my despatch

No.456

of the 16th April, 1948.

In the circumstances I fear that I am unable

to agree that any part of the loss should

fall on H. M. G., and in view of your

recommendation as regards War Damage

Compensation there appears to be no

alternative but for the loss to be borne by

the claimants themselves. In your despatch

No. 15 of the 28th January, 1948,

paragraph 6, you accepted the suggestion

that these claims should be rejected, on

the understanding that settlement of

雌

Category C claims should be made on the

basis of 25% of the amount involved, as

mentioned in paragraph 5 of my despatch

No. 400 of 1947. (I recur to this point

below).

In your despatch No. 227 of the

30th September 1947 you referred to

Category "B" and "C" claims against the

R

Government of India, the

and DADOS Hong Kong.

.A. F. Singapore The category "B"

element