Factory making Mainframe Cylinder Tooling to Brisbane Importers
Company Core Philosophy
The company is specialized in casting mould technology design, tooling development, mould making,gravity casting aluminum alloy products, machining service as a whole, and has 36 seniorr&dengineers. 20 years experience in professional mould making.Strong technical team with certain research and development capabilities.Full machinery focus on quality and after-sales service.
Payment & Delivery
Payment Terms: 30% for deposit, 70% before shipment.
Package Details: usually use the standard 1200*800mm wood pallet, but can customized packaging according to the different products.
Delivery： 45 days after order confirmation.
There are 4 workshops in the company which including tooling workshop, casting workshop , machining workshop ,cleaning workshop and one full-equipped laboratory.
China Foundry Expo
Participate in China Foundry Expo every year.
Q:Plant Maturity – Years in service?
Q:Project Management is existed for new production?
Q:Ownership – Main Share Holders?
Q:Export License and/ or Experience?
Q:Products Development time?
Q:Products Cycle time ?
It is a good way to improve our products and service. Our mission is to develop creative products to customers with a good experience for Factory making Mainframe Cylinder Tooling to Brisbane Importers, We welcome new and old customers to contact us by phone or send us inquiries by mail for future business relationships and achieving mutual success.
เครื่องตบทราย FIMA 1 By HOF Hydraulic
2) สร้างมาตราทำงานแทนระบบ joint squeeze ได้
3) ลดจำนวนคนทำงานได้ และผลิตได้มากกว่า 80 โมลด์ต่อชั่วโมง
สนใจติดต่อได้ที่ +6688-9515145 คุณ อรพรรณ
Foundry plug-and-read-to-use solution
–1st step in revolutionizing your foundry from jolt squeeze to auto molding
–Hydraulic operated system
–80 molds / hour
contact Ms Oraphan
Appellate lawyer, Brian Radnoff, provides a summary of Lerners’ Top 5 Ontario civil appeals decision from February 2015.
1. Meady v. Greyhound Canada Transportation Corp.
This appeal arises from a severe bus accident wherein a mentally disturbed passenger took over the steering wheel of a Greyhound bus resulting in a severe accident. In this decision, the Court of Appeal upheld a trial judge’s decision to disallow evidence from two experts on the standard of care. There was no issue with the trial judge’s findings that standard of care test applicable to both the bus driver and the police officers, who had previously dealt with the disturbed passenger, had been met and there was no breach in their duty. The appeal was dismissed.
2. First Elgin Mills v. Romandale Farms
This appeal involves a request for a rehearing of an appeal. The Court of Appeal had overturned a judge’s decision regarding the proper interpretation of a contract. The unsuccessful party requested a rehearing on the basis that the Court of Appeal’s decision had come out just after the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Sattva v. Moly Creston Corp. The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion indicating that the analysis would not have changed regardless of the standard applied and that no serious injustice would result if it declined to rehear the appeal.
3. Ibrahim v. Robinson
This appeal arose out of a motor vehicle accident that occurred in Michigan. The plaintiff sued in Ontario and the defendant contested the jurisdiction of the Ontario Court to hear the action. There was, however, a significant delay from when the action was commenced and a motion brought by the defendant contesting the jurisdiction was heard. Jurisdictional law had changed considerably during the time of the delay but despite this the motion judge ruled that the Ontario Court had jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal affirmed the decision.
4. Moore v. Getahun
This issue in this appeal centres on the duties of experts and counsel’s interactions with experts. The trial judge in this matter implied that counsel for one of the parties had acted improperly by communicating with an expert witness about their report. The Court of Appeal determined that counsel had done nothing wrong and stated that communication is necessary between counsel and expert witnesses to properly prepare a report that assists the court in making its decision and if there were any questions about an expert’s report, those questions should be the subject of a cross-examination.
5. Westbell Networks Inc. v. Bell Canada
This appeal required the Court of Appeal to consider the Supreme Court of Canada’s recent decision in Sattva v. Moly Creston Corp. regarding contractual interpretation and the amount of defence to be given to a trial judge’s contractual interpretation. The Court of Appeal confirmed the trial judge’s interpretation of the contract is to be given deference.