Palmer Refutes

We reject the TEMPO article Sweeping Clean (April 16). On page 48 it stated: In February 2000, the district court judge ruled in favor of Indomaz, although only awarding US$ 477,000 in damages. Nestle failed to file a request for appeal within the permissible 14-day limit, but filed its request one day after the deadline had expired. The court rejected the request.

This is absolutely untrue. The South Jakarta District Court never rejected Nestl

Subscribe to continue reading.
We craft news with stories.

For the benefits of subscribing to Digital Tempo, See More

The Best Choice

Rp 54.945/Month

Active for 12 Months, Rp 659.340

• *You Save -Rp 102.000
• *Guaranteed update of up to 52 Editions of Tempo Magazine

Subscribe

Rp 64.380/Month

Active Every Month Cancel Anytime

• *Free for the first month if using a Credit Card

Subscribe

See Other Packages

Already a Subscribed? Log in here
To receive daily news by Email, Sign up for Tempo ID.