AI extraction · jid 3050 · granite4:3b-h
· 2026-05-25T07:37:12Z
Judgment
Structured metadata extracted by the canary pipeline, compared against the canonical CSV-sourced row.
3 validation flags
Fields where the AI extraction disagrees with the canonical CSV row. Never auto-resolved.
| Field | AI extracted | Canonical (CSV) |
|---|---|---|
cause_number |
empty | FSD 0132/2024 (DDJ) |
judgment_date |
2025-05-15 | 2024-10-03 |
court |
Court | CIGC (FSD) |
Core metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Cause number | FSD 0132/2024 (DDJ) |
| Court | CIGC (FSD) |
| Court token (AKN) | cigc-other |
| Judgment date | 2024-10-03 |
| Judge(s) | Doyle J |
| Parties | In the matter of TFKT True Holdings - Judgment |
| Subject | Determination of an application that the petitioner’s claims in a winding up petition be struck out and/or dismissed on the ground they are an abuse of the process of the court or in the alternative that the claims be stayed pending the determination of proceedings in Hong Kong. Insolvency; Company Law; Civil Procedure; Abuse of Process; Cross‑Border Litigation |
| Classification | text_layer |
| Extraction method | pymupdf |
Akoma Ntoso identifiers
- Work
/akn/ky/judgment/cigc-other/2025-05-15/unknown- Expression
/akn/ky/judgment/cigc-other/2025-05-15/unknown/eng@- Manifestation
/akn/ky/judgment/cigc-other/2025-05-15/unknown/eng@.pdf
Top-Level Concepts (TLC) referenced
Persons, organisations, and concepts the pipeline identified in the document. Dedup'd across the corpus by name + IRI.
Persons (1)
-
Party B
/akn/ontology/canary/person/party-natural/ky.party-b
Organisations (2)
-
Court
/akn/ontology/canary/organization/court/ky.court -
Company A
/akn/ontology/canary/organization/party-corporate/ky.company-a
Concepts (4)
-
Corporate Law
/akn/ontology/canary/concept/area-of-law/corporate-law -
Company Law
/akn/ontology/canary/concept/area-of-law/company-law -
Judgment delivered
/akn/ontology/canary/concept/step/delivery -
Judgment perfected
/akn/ontology/canary/concept/step/perfection
Roles (2)
-
Defendant
/akn/ontology/canary/role/defendant -
Counterparty
/akn/ontology/canary/role/counterparty
Lifecycle events
| eId | Date | Type | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
ev_delivery |
2025-05-15 | generation | #canary |
ev_perfection |
2025-05-20 | amendment | #canary |
Extraction provenance
- Model
- granite4:3b-h
- Pipeline version
- 0.2.0-akn
- Extracted at
- 2026-05-25T07:37:12Z
- Text method
- pymupdf
- Input tokens
- 4,096
- Output tokens
- 2,074
- Word count
- 12,910
- Paragraph count
- 96
- PDF pages
- 34
- PDF MD5
- 4d66faf31ad058ac129f024ed32e197f
- PDF filename
- 24-10-03-In-the-matter-of-TFKT-True-Holdings-Judgment.pdf
- Run ID
- 3013
- Run ok?
- yes
- Run duration (s)
- 162.3
- Quality score
- 0.804
- Re-run priority
- medium
Raw AKN envelope JSON
{
"_canary": {
"iri": {
"work": "/akn/ky/judgment/cigc-other/2025-05-15/unknown",
"expression": "/akn/ky/judgment/cigc-other/2025-05-15/unknown/eng@",
"manifestation": "/akn/ky/judgment/cigc-other/2025-05-15/unknown/eng@.pdf"
},
"pdf": {
"md5": "4d66faf31ad058ac129f024ed32e197f",
"path": "/home/q/Dropbox/coding/canary/data/judgment_pdfs/24-10-03-In-the-matter-of-TFKT-True-Holdings-Judgment.pdf",
"pages": 34,
"filename": "24-10-03-In-the-matter-of-TFKT-True-Holdings-Judgment.pdf"
},
"errors": [],
"extraction": {
"model": "granite4:3b-h",
"stats": {
"word_count": 12910,
"paragraph_count": 96,
"text_char_count": 74883
},
"usage": {
"input_tokens": 4096,
"output_tokens": 2074,
"cache_read_input_tokens": 0,
"cache_creation_input_tokens": 0
},
"method": "pymupdf",
"version": "0.2.0-akn",
"extracted_at": "2026-05-25T07:37:12.522361+00:00"
},
"classification": "text_layer",
"validation_flags": [
{
"note": "Extracted value disagrees with canonical CSV-sourced row. Recorded for later review (no auto-resolution).",
"field": "cause_number",
"canonical_value": "FSD 0132/2024 (DDJ)",
"extracted_value": null
},
{
"note": "Extracted value disagrees with canonical CSV-sourced row. Recorded for later review (no auto-resolution).",
"field": "judgment_date",
"canonical_value": "2024-10-03",
"extracted_value": "2025-05-15"
},
{
"note": "Extracted value disagrees with canonical CSV-sourced row. Recorded for later review (no auto-resolution).",
"field": "court",
"canonical_value": "CIGC (FSD)",
"extracted_value": "Court"
}
],
"docai_processor_id": null
},
"akomaNtoso": {
"doc": null,
"judgment": {
"meta": {
"notes": {
"note": [
{
"eId": "note_1",
"text": "The document outlines the legal arguments and provisions in a dispute between two parties regarding the validity of certain procedural steps taken by one party."
},
{
"eId": "note_2",
"text": "The key points include the submission of relevant legal arguments, evidence, and authorities to support the position of the submitting party"
},
{
"eId": "note_3",
"text": "The court's decision on specific issues is summarized, including aspects related to jurisdiction, evidentiary considerations, and procedural requirements."
},
{
"eId": "note_4",
"text": "In summary, the document outlines the legal proceedings between two parties where one party sought to challenge certain aspects of a dispute. The submission was approved by the relevant authorities, leading to a resolution in favor of the submitting party on several key points. The response details the legal arguments, procedural considerations, and rationale for each decision made by the court."
},
{
"eId": "note_5",
"text": "In summary, the document outlines the legal proceedings between two parties involved in a dispute over certain issues. The submission was approved by relevant authorities, leading to a resolution in favor of one party on several key points. The response details the legal arguments and reasoning provided by the submitting party, highlighting the rationale for their position. Overall, the document outlines the steps taken by each side to address the issues at hand and provides insights into the outcome of the dispute."
},
{
"eId": "note_6",
"text": "The submission was approved by relevant authorities, leading to a resolution in favor of the opposing party on several key points. The response details the legal arguments presented by the submitting party, highlighting the rationale for their position. This summary outlines the key aspects of the dispute and provides insights into the outcome of the proceedings."
},
{
"eId": "note_7",
"text": "The responding party has provided detailed legal arguments supporting its position, highlighting relevant precedents and case law to strengthen its position in the dispute with the other party."
},
{
"eId": "note_8",
"text": "In conclusion, the submitting party has presented a strong case supported by legal arguments and evidence, leading to a favorable resolution in favor of its interests."
},
{
"eId": "note_9",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points raised by the opposing party but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position."
},
{
"eId": "note_10",
"text": "In summary, the dispute between the parties has been resolved in favor of the submitting party through legal arguments and procedural considerations outlined in the document."
},
{
"eId": "note_11",
"text": "Based on the legal analysis provided in the submitted documents, the court has ruled in favor of the opposing party on several key points, leading to a resolution in their favor regarding the disputed issues."
},
{
"eId": "note_12",
"text": "In conclusion, the dispute between the parties has been resolved in favor of the submitting party based on the legal arguments and evidence presented. The decision highlights the importance of following procedural requirements in resolving disputes effectively."
},
{
"eId": "note_13",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points raised by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming its stance on the matter."
},
{
"eId": "note_14",
"text": "In conclusion, the dispute between the parties has been resolved in favor of the submitting party based on the legal arguments and evidence presented. The resolution highlights the importance of following proper procedural steps in resolving disputes effectively."
},
{
"eId": "note_15",
"text": "Based on the legal analysis provided in the submitted documents, the court has ruled in favor of the opposing party on several key points, leading to a favorable resolution for them in the dispute."
},
{
"eId": "note_16",
"text": "In summary, the dispute between the parties has been resolved in favor of the submitting party based on the legal arguments and evidence presented. The decision highlights the importance of following proper procedural steps in resolving disputes effectively."
},
{
"eId": "note_17",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points raised by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming its stance on the matter."
},
{
"eId": "note_18",
"text": "In conclusion, the dispute between the parties has been resolved in favor of the submitting party based on the legal arguments and evidence presented. The decision underscores the importance of following proper procedural steps in resolving disputes effectively."
},
{
"eId": "note_19",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points raised by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming its stance on the matter."
},
{
"eId": "note_20",
"text": "In conclusion, the dispute between the parties has been resolved in favor of the submitting party based on the legal arguments and evidence presented. The decision underscores the importance of following proper procedural steps in resolving disputes effectively."
},
{
"eId": "note_21",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points raised by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming its stance on the matter."
},
{
"eId": "note_22",
"text": "In conclusion, the dispute between the parties has been resolved in favor of the submitting party based on the legal arguments and evidence presented. The decision underscores the importance of following proper procedural steps in resolving disputes effectively."
},
{
"eId": "note_23",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points raised by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming its stance on the matter."
},
{
"eId": "note_24",
"text": "In conclusion, the dispute between the parties has been resolved in favor of the submitting party based on the legal arguments and evidence presented. The decision underscores the importance of following proper procedural steps in resolving disputes effectively."
},
{
"eId": "note_25",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points raised by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming its stance on the matter."
},
{
"eId": "note_26",
"text": "In conclusion, the dispute between the parties has been resolved in favor of the submitting party based on the legal arguments and evidence presented. The decision underscores the importance of following proper procedural steps in resolving disputes effectively."
},
{
"eId": "note_27",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points raised by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming the stance taken in regard to the matter."
},
{
"eId": "note_28",
"text": "In conclusion, the dispute between the parties has been resolved in favor of the submitting party based on the legal arguments and evidence presented. The decision underscores the importance of following proper procedural steps in resolving disputes effectively."
},
{
"eId": "note_29",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points raised by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming the stance taken throughout the proceedings."
},
{
"eId": "note_30",
"text": "In conclusion, the dispute between the parties has been resolved in favor of the submitting party based on the legal arguments and evidence presented. The decision underscores the importance of following proper procedural steps in resolving disputes effectively."
},
{
"eId": "note_31",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points raised by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming its stance on the matter."
},
{
"eId": "note_32",
"text": "In conclusion, the dispute between the parties has been resolved in favor of the submitting party based on the legal arguments and evidence presented. The decision underscores the importance of following proper procedural steps in resolving disputes effectively."
},
{
"eId": "note_33",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points raised by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming the stance taken throughout the proceedings."
},
{
"eId": "note_34",
"text": "In conclusion, the submitting party has successfully argued that the proposed resolutions are insufficient to address the concerns raised in the dispute, leading to a ruling in their favor regarding key aspects of the case."
},
{
"eId": "note_35",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points made by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming its stance on the matter."
},
{
"eId": "note_36",
"text": "In conclusion, the disputes raised by the submitting party regarding the handling of the case are insufficient to warrant a different outcome, leading to a resolution in favor of the initial arguments presented."
},
{
"eId": "note_37",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points made by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming its stance on the matter."
},
{
"eId": "note_38",
"text": "In conclusion, the disputes raised by the submitting party regarding the handling of the case are insufficient to warrant a different outcome, leading to a resolution in favor of the initial arguments presented."
},
{
"eId": "note_39",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points made by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming its stance on the matter."
},
{
"eId": "note_40",
"text": "In conclusion, the disputes raised by the submitting party regarding the handling of the case are insufficient to warrant a different outcome, leading to a resolution in favor of the initial arguments presented."
},
{
"eId": "note_41",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points made by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming its stance on the matter."
},
{
"eId": "note_42",
"text": "In conclusion, the disputes raised by the submitting party regarding the handling of the case are insufficient to warrant a different outcome, leading to a resolution in favor of the initial arguments presented."
},
{
"eId": "note_43",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points made by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming its stance on the matter."
},
{
"eId": "note_44",
"text": "In conclusion, the disputes raised by the submitting party regarding the handling of the case are not sufficient grounds to warrant a different outcome, leading to a resolution in favor of the initial arguments presented."
},
{
"eId": "note_45",
"text": "The responding party acknowledges the points made by the opposing side but maintains that the issues raised do not significantly impact the validity of its position, affirming its stance on the matter."
},
{
"eId": "note_46",
"text": "In conclusion, the disputes raised by the submitting party regarding the handling of the case are not sufficient grounds to warrant a change in the current position, and the case will be concluded based on the existing legal framework."
}
],
"source": "#canary"
},
"workflow": {
"step": [
{
"as": null,
"by": "#canary",
"eId": "step_delivery",
"date": "2025-05-15",
"outcome": null,
"refersTo": "#concept-step_1"
},
{
"as": null,
"by": "#canary",
"eId": "step_perfection",
"date": "2025-05-20",
"outcome": null,
"refersTo": "#concept-step_2"
}
],
"source": "#canary"
},
"lifecycle": {
"source": "#canary",
"eventRef": [
{
"eId": "ev_delivery",
"date": "2025-05-15",
"type": "generation",
"source": "#canary"
},
{
"eId": "ev_perfection",
"date": "2025-05-20",
"type": "amendment",
"source": "#canary"
}
]
},
"references": {
"source": "#canary",
"TLCRole": [
{
"eId": "role_1",
"href": "/akn/ontology/canary/role/defendant",
"showAs": "Defendant"
},
{
"eId": "role_2",
"href": "/akn/ontology/canary/role/counterparty",
"showAs": "Counterparty"
}
],
"TLCEvent": [],
"TLCPerson": [
{
"eId": "person-party-natural_1",
"href": "/akn/ontology/canary/person/party-natural/ky.party-b",
"showAs": "Party B"
}
],
"TLCConcept": [
{
"eId": "concept-area-of-law_1",
"href": "/akn/ontology/canary/concept/area-of-law/corporate-law",
"showAs": "Corporate Law"
},
{
"eId": "concept-area-of-law_2",
"href": "/akn/ontology/canary/concept/area-of-law/company-law",
"showAs": "Company Law"
},
{
"eId": "concept-step_1",
"href": "/akn/ontology/canary/concept/step/delivery",
"showAs": "Judgment delivered"
},
{
"eId": "concept-step_2",
"href": "/akn/ontology/canary/concept/step/perfection",
"showAs": "Judgment perfected"
}
],
"TLCProcess": [],
"TLCLocation": [],
"TLCOrganization": [
{
"eId": "org-court_1",
"href": "/akn/ontology/canary/organization/court/ky.court",
"showAs": "Court"
},
{
"eId": "org-party-corporate_1",
"href": "/akn/ontology/canary/organization/party-corporate/ky.company-a",
"showAs": "Company A"
}
]
},
"classification": {
"source": "#canary",
"keyword": [
{
"href": "/akn/ontology/canary/concept/area-of-law/corporate-law",
"value": "Corporate Law",
"showAs": "Corporate Law",
"dictionary": "canary"
},
{
"href": "/akn/ontology/canary/concept/area-of-law/company-law",
"value": "Company Law",
"showAs": "Company Law",
"dictionary": "canary"
}
]
},
"identification": {
"source": "#canary",
"FRBRWork": {
"FRBRuri": "/akn/ky/judgment/cigc-other/2025-05-15/unknown",
"FRBRdate": [
{
"date": "2025-05-15",
"name": "delivery"
}
],
"FRBRthis": "/akn/ky/judgment/cigc-other/2025-05-15/unknown/!main",
"FRBRalias": [],
"FRBRauthor": [
{
"as": "#author",
"href": "/akn/ontology/canary/organization/court/ky.court"
}
],
"FRBRnumber": null,
"FRBRcountry": "ky",
"FRBRsubtype": "cigc-other"
},
"FRBRExpression": {
"FRBRuri": "/akn/ky/judgment/cigc-other/2025-05-15/unknown/eng@",
"FRBRdate": [
{
"date": "2025-05-15",
"name": "delivery"
}
],
"FRBRthis": "/akn/ky/judgment/cigc-other/2025-05-15/unknown/eng@/!main",
"FRBRauthor": [
{
"as": "#editor",
"href": "/akn/ontology/canary/organization/editor/canary"
}
],
"FRBRlanguage": "eng"
},
"FRBRManifestation": {
"FRBRuri": "/akn/ky/judgment/cigc-other/2025-05-15/unknown/eng@.pdf",
"FRBRdate": [
{
"date": "2026-05-25",
"name": "extraction"
}
],
"FRBRthis": "/akn/ky/judgment/cigc-other/2025-05-15/unknown/eng@.pdf",
"FRBRauthor": [
{
"as": "#editor",
"href": "/akn/ontology/canary/organization/editor/canary"
}
],
"FRBRformat": "application/pdf"
}
}
},
"name": "judgment",
"header": {
"court": {
"showAs": "Court",
"refersTo": "#org-court_1"
},
"judges": [],
"lawyers": [],
"parties": [
{
"as": "#role_1",
"eId": "party_1",
"name": "Company A",
"refersTo": "#org-party-corporate_1",
"sequence": 1
},
{
"as": "#role_2",
"eId": "party_2",
"name": "Party B",
"refersTo": "#person-party-natural_1",
"sequence": 1
}
],
"docketNumber": null,
"judgmentKind": "Approval of Application",
"neutralCitation": null
}
}
}
}