Allergan, Inc & Anor v Amazon Medica & Anor

Allergan, Inc & Anor v Amazon Medica & Anor

The court has no jurisdiction to grant the order because the evidence sought is mainly investigatory and not for trial, and the intention underlying the request is not to obtain evidence for use at trial. The documentary and oral requests are too wide, lack specificity, and are not confined to issues relevant to trial. Even if jurisdiction existed, the court would not exercise its discretion to grant the order due to its mainly investigatory character.

Parties
Applicant: Mr Amerjeet Mudan; Applicant: Mrs Tajinder Mudan Mudan; Applicant: Mudan Pharma Ltd; Applicant: Rose Healthcare Ltd; Respondent: Allergan, Inc.; Respondent: Allergan USA, Inc.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Order Under Evidence (proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975 / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Order
Outcome
Order set aside; application granted.
Legal Topics
Letters of Request, Evidence (proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975, Jurisdiction, Discovery, Witness Examination
Civil Procedure International Judicial Assistance Letters of Request Evidence (proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975 Jurisdiction Discovery Witness Examination

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Amerjeet Mudan

Applicant

Mrs Tajinder Mudan Mudan

Applicant

Mudan Pharma Ltd

Applicant

Rose Healthcare Ltd

Applicant

Allergan, Inc.

Respondent

Allergan USA, Inc.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Order Under Evidence (proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975 / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court has jurisdiction to grant the order sought under the Evidence (Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975
  2. 2 Whether the evidence sought is for trial or is investigatory in nature
  3. 3 Whether the documentary requests meet the specificity requirements of section 2(4) of the 1975 Act

Ratio Decidendi

The court has no jurisdiction to grant the order because the evidence sought is mainly investigatory and not for trial, and the intention underlying the request is not to obtain evidence for use at trial. The documentary and oral requests are too wide, lack specificity, and are not confined to issues relevant to trial. Even if jurisdiction existed, the court would not exercise its discretion to grant the order due to its mainly investigatory character.

Court Disposition

Order set aside; application granted.

Orders

  • Order of Master Yoxall dated 3 August 2017 set aside.
  • No order for provision of oral or documentary evidence by the Mudan Entities.